MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Impediments to Research in Pediatric Dermatology: The Results of a Survey of the Members of the Society for Pediatric Dermatology

2010· article· en· W2151623685 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Dermatology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedicine and Dermatology Studies History
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDermatologyFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A research task force of the Society for Pediatric Dermatology (SPD) was established to investigate the barriers to expanding research in the field of pediatric dermatology. A survey was designed to address constraints limiting research activities among members of the SPD. A nine-question survey was distributed to SPD members at the annual meeting in 2007. Of the 70 respondents, 99% reported limitations to research activities. Of those, 90% (62/69) cited time constraints as a cause, 71% lack of funding, 38% lack of training, 35% lack of research infrastructure, 10% (7/69) lack of mentoring, and 25% (17/69) cited other reasons. SPD members face many challenges that curtail their bench and clinical research, although time constraints are most common. The high demand for clinic-directed activity and continuing workforce issues in the specialty likely contribute to the time constraints.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.228
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.295 · 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