Keeping up with Best Evidence: What Resources are Available?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Evidence-based medicine (EBM) teaches physicians to base their decisions and actions on the best available scientific evidence in conjunction with their own expertise and the patient's values and preferences; however, this can be very time consuming as a one has to stay current and up-to-date with the most recent evidence. Several point-of-care databases, such as Up To Date and Dynamed, have been developed that distill the contents of medical journals into summaries with guidelines for practice in order to aid in EBM approach, but these also come with various limitations. Due to this, tools specific to surgical specialties are now beginning to be developed that systematically collect, appraise and summarize top quality evidence. One such tool is Ortho Evidence, which is an openaccess tool for orthopedic surgeons, researchers and allied healthcare professionals. How to cite this article Hussain N, Turvey S, Bhandari M. Keeping up with Best Evidence: What Resources are Available? J Postgrad Med Edu Res 2012;46(1):4-7.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.018 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".