MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2251192592 · doi:10.1016/j.juro.2015.12.055

Decisions, Decisions, Decisions

2015· letter· en· W2251192592 on OpenAlexaff
Armando J. Lorenzo, Luis H. Braga

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Urology · 2015
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrological Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcMaster Children's HospitalSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHypospadiasMedicineRegretPenile cancerGynecologyPenisGeneral surgerySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

No AccessJournal of UrologyEditorial1 Mar 2016Decisions, Decisions, Decisions Armando J. Lorenzo and Luis H.P. Braga Armando J. LorenzoArmando J. Lorenzo More articles by this author and Luis H.P. BragaLuis H.P. Braga More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2015.12.055AboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail References 1 : Parental decisional regret after primary distal hypospadias repair: family and surgery variables, and repair outcomes. J Urol2016; 195: 720. Link, Google Scholar 2 : Decisional regret after distal hypospadias repair: single institution prospective analysis of factors associated with subsequent parental remorse or distress. J Urol2014; 191: 1558. Link, Google Scholar 3 : Do adult men with untreated hypospadias have adverse outcomes? A pilot study using a social media advertised survey. J Pediatr Urol2014; 10: 672. Google Scholar 4 : Evidence regarding cosmetic and medically unnecessary surgery on infants. J Pediatr Urol2014; 10: 2. Google Scholar 5 : Evaluating the quality of Internet health resources in pediatric urology. J Pediatr Urol2013; 9: 151. Google Scholar 6 : Online hypospadias support group data analysis. J Pediatr Surg2011; 46: 520. Google Scholar 7 : Penile length is normal in most men seeking penile lengthening procedures. Int J Impot Res2002; 14: 283. Google Scholar 8 : What is a good looking penis? How women rate the penile appearance of men with surgically corrected hypospadias. J Sex Med2015; 12: 1737. Google Scholar 9 : Analysis of decisional conflict among parents who consent to hypospadias repair: single institution prospective study of 100 couples. J Urol2012; 188: 571. Link, Google Scholar 10 : Promoting shared decision making in disorders of sex development (DSD): decision aids and support tools. Horm Metab Res2015; 47: 335. Google Scholar © 2016 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 195Issue 3March 2016Page: 551-553 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2016 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Armando J. Lorenzo More articles by this author Luis H.P. Braga More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.101
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.228
Threshold uncertainty score0.762

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.101
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.006
Scholarly communication0.0120.009
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0060.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2280.079

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.250 · 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
GenreEditorial

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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of UrologySame topicUrological Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207