MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2149257070 · doi:10.1503/cmaj.080247

"Doctor, will that x-ray harm my unborn child?"

2008· review· en· W2149257070 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Savithiri Ratnapalan, Yedidia Bentur, Gideon Koren

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Medical Association Journal · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Dose and Imaging
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHarmAnxietyRadiation exposurePregnancyMedicineIonizing radiationHealth careMedical physicsPediatricsObstetricsFamily medicinePsychiatryPsychologyNuclear medicinePhysicsBiologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Exposure to ionizing radiation can be a source of anxiety for many pregnant women and their health care providers. An awareness of the radiation doses delivered by different techniques and the acceptable exposure thresholds can help both patients and practitioners. We describe exposure to radiodiagnostic procedures during pregnancy and suggest an approach to assess the potential risk.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.004

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.276 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations84
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Medical Association JournalSame topicRadiation Dose and ImagingFrench-language works237,207