MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2314844535 · doi:10.1097/jac.0b013e3181e62c15

International Health Consumers in The Cochrane Collaboration

2010· article· en· W2314844535 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Ambulatory Care Management · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMental Health and Patient Involvement
Canadian institutionsCochrane
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSystematic reviewCochrane collaborationGeneral partnershipBusinessCochrane LibraryRelevance (law)MedicineMEDLINEPublic relationsHealth careMarketingAlternative medicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Cochrane Consumer Network (CCNet) is an international organization of volunteers, operating through the Internet, to enhance the accessibility and relevance of Cochrane systematic reviews and to promote evidence-based health care through consumer and community participation. This article presents the accomplishments and challenges of involving consumers in The Cochrane Collaboration as indicated by 2 surveys (CCNet-led evaluation 2006 and External consultant-led evaluation 2009). While consumers are effectively involved in commenting on prepublished Cochrane systematic reviews, opportunities exist to strengthen consumer participation in prioritizing, producing, and disseminating Cochrane systematic reviews and in promoting greater understanding and application of evidence-based health care in various countries and cultures. It is important that consumer participation adds value for all involved in the process and that it is developed in partnership.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.649
Threshold uncertainty score0.313

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.062
GPT teacher head0.442
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