MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2286087748

The heartsink patient : editor's comment

2005· article· fr· W2286087748 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Bridget Farham

Bibliographic record

VenueCME: Your SA Journal of CPD · 2005
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldMedicine
TopicTravel-related health issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeadachesAnxietyBluntPsychologyIncidence (geometry)PopulationPsychiatryMedicineFamily medicinePsychoanalysisSurgeryEnvironmental health
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Extracted from text ... EDITORIAL July 2005 Vol.23 No.7 CME 321 'Doctor, I've got a headache.' I don't know about you, but that certainly used to be one of my heartsink openers. But headaches are ubiquitous. We all get them and they are one of the most common presenting symptoms in any general practice - across cultures, gender and the world. The patient population I worked with in Labrador seemed to have an unusually high incidence of anxiety and psychosomatic illness - to be blunt, there were a lot of people with very fat folders and not a lot wrong with them. Arriving ..

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.050
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 score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.050
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0310.027
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.013

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 head0.324
Teacher spread0.301 · 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

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCME: Your SA Journal of CPDSame topicTravel-related health issuesFrench-language works237,207