MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2146101414 · doi:10.1503/cmaj.109-3296

Former senior editor at The Lancet cries foul over firing for "gross misconduct"

2010· article· en· W2146101414 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Roger Collier

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Medical Association Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Systems and Challenges
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExcuseMisconductDismissalScientific misconductMinor (academic)PsychoanalysisCriminologyPsychologyLawPolitical scienceMedicineAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An editorial squabble at The Lancet has resulted in the dismissal of a senior editor, who believes she paid a major penalty for a minor transgression because the journal’s publisher, Elsevier, was looking for an excuse to fire her. On Mar. 20, The Lancet published an editorial appraising the

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.084
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.084
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0090.003
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0180.025
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.014

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.057
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.355 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Medical Association JournalSame topicHealthcare Systems and ChallengesFrench-language works237,207