MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2294784201 · doi:10.1503/cmaj.160283

Upholding the integrity of your <i>CMAJ</i>

2016· editorial· en· W2294784201 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Diane Kelsall, Kirsten Patrick, Matthew B. Stanbrook, Barbara Sibbald, Ken Flegel, Erin Russell, Dorian Deshauer, Jayna Holroyd‐Leduc, Monika Kastner, Sharon E. Straus, George William Wells, Moneeza Walji

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Medical Association Journal · 2016
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClinical practice guidelines implementation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTask forceTask (project management)Corporate governanceOperations researchComputer sciencePolitical scienceManagementPublic administrationEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On Feb. 29, 2016, the Canadian Medical Association (CMA) disbanded the CMAJ ’s Journal Oversight Committee (JOC), dismissed Editor-in-Chief Dr. John Fletcher and set up a task force to consult on the future vision and governance of the journal.[1][1] It is not up to us to explain the CMA’s

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)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.141
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score0.127

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.141
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.006
Scholarly communication0.0120.004
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0220.035
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.016

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.358 · 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.

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

Citations15
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Medical Association JournalSame topicClinical practice guidelines implementationFrench-language works237,207