MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2163839878 · doi:10.1067/mem.2001.115881

Evaluating the quality of systematic reviews in the emergency medicine literature

2001· article· en· W2163839878 on OpenAlexafffund
Karen D. Kelly, Andrew H. Travers, Marlene Dorgan, Linda Slater, Brian H. Rowe

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Emergency Medicine · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMeta-analysis and systematic reviews
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsSystematic reviewMedicineMEDLINEMeta-analysisQuality (philosophy)Confidence intervalFamily medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmaMetaresearch
Domain: Evaluation · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Systematic reviewlow
gptMetaresearch
Domain: Methods · Genre: Review
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Systematic reviewmedium
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.433
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.815
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Evaluation · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.970
Threshold uncertainty score0.699

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.4330.815
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0070.006
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0300.049
Bibliometrics0.0350.018
Science and technology studies0.0020.006
Scholarly communication0.0100.008
Open science0.0050.008
Research integrity0.0080.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.958
GPT teacher head0.705
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

Study designSystematic review
DomainEvaluation · Methods
GenreEmpirical · Review

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

Citations81
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Emergency MedicineSame topicMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsCategoryMetaresearchFrench-language works237,207