MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2152564027 · doi:10.1136/bmj.332.7535.188

Offering results to research participants

2006· letter· en· W2152564027 on OpenAlexaff
S. Danielle MacNeil, Conrad V. Fernandez

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ · 2006
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEthics in Clinical Research
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResearch ethicsObligationGuidelineQualitative researchMedicineMedical educationInformed consentClinical trialAlternative medicineVariety (cybernetics)Family medicinePsychologyPolitical scienceLawSociologySocial sciencePsychiatryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

effectiveness of screening in practice on the basis of this study, but it would probably be in the region of 1500-2000 per successful treatment, based on a cost difference of 50 for testing and eradication and a response rate of 3% compared with no screening. In contrast, the CADET-Hp study found that a test and treat strategy reduced the cost per successful treatment by $C387 (188; $333; 275) (-$C1707 to $C607). ane and colleagues provide further evidence that eradicating H pylori is beneficial. But their study does not greatly change the evidence base of the 2004 NICE guideline which recommended H pylori eradication as first choice in endoscopically proved peptic ulcer and functional dyspepsia and as a treatment option in uninvestigated dyspepsia.

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 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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.085
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.247
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.085
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.019
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.005

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 head0.879
GPT teacher head0.706
Teacher spread0.173 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations31
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJSame topicEthics in Clinical ResearchFrench-language works237,207