MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2325349137 · doi:10.1093/asj/sjw055

In Defense of the International Collaboration of Breast Registry Activities (ICOBRA)

2016· letter· en· W2325349137 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rod Cooter, Richard C. Barnett, Anand K. Deva, Mark Magnusson, John J. McNeil, Graeme Perks, Hinne A. Rakhorst, Charles N. Verheyden

Bibliographic record

VenueAesthetic Surgery Journal · 2016
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrthopaedic implants and arthroplasty
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMacquarie UniversityMonash UniversityUniversity of NottinghamAustralasian Foundation for Plastic SurgeryBaylor University
KeywordsMedicineMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The International Collaboration of Breast Registry Activities (ICOBRA) involves the national plastic surgery societies of several countries, including Australia, Austria, Canada, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, New Zealand, South Africa, the United Kingdom, and the United States. 1 Its inception was triggered by the Poly Implant Prostheses (PIP) crisis in France in 2010. It was clear at this time that no existing or past breast implant registry was in a position to alert government and regulatory authorities.

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 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)0.001
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.592
Threshold uncertainty score0.394

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations17
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAesthetic Surgery JournalSame topicOrthopaedic implants and arthroplastyFrench-language works237,207