MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2300713759 · doi:10.1007/s00586-016-4467-7

Management of neck pain and associated disorders: A clinical practice guideline from the Ontario Protocol for Traffic Injury Management (OPTIMa) Collaboration

2016· review· en· W2300713759 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Pierre Côté, Jessica J. Wong, Deborah Sutton, Heather M. Shearer, Silvano Mior, Kristi Randhawa, Arthur Ameis, Linda Carroll, Margareta Nordin, Hainan Yu, Gail Lindsay, Danielle Southerst, Sharanya Varatharajan, Craig Jacobs, Maja Stupar, Anne Taylor‐Vaisey, Gabrielle van der Velde, Douglas P. Gross, Robert J. Brison, Mike Paulden, Carlo Ammendolia, J. David Cassidy, Patrick Loisel, Shawn Marshall, Richard N. Bohay, John Stapleton, Michel Lacerte, Murray Krahn, Roger Salhany

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Spine Journal · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaPublic Health OntarioQueen's UniversityToronto Public HealthMount Sinai HospitalKingston General HospitalInstitute for Work & HealthWestern UniversityUniversity of TorontoUniversity of AlbertaUniversité de MontréalUniversity of Ontario Institute of TechnologyCanadian Memorial Chiropractic College
FundersMinistry of FinanceCanada Research ChairsFinancial Services CommissionUniversity of Ontario Institute of TechnologyComanche Nation
KeywordsMedicineGuidelineProtocol (science)Pain managementNeurosurgeryNeck painPhysical therapyMedical emergencySurgeryAlternative medicinePathology

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

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.774
Threshold uncertainty score0.450

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.006
Bibliometrics0.0060.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0050.003
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.381 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations297
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Spine JournalSame topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationFrench-language works237,207