MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2331249017 · doi:10.1542/neo.15-4-e133

Principles of Use of Biostatistics in Research

2014· article· en· W2331249017 on OpenAlexaff
Veena Manja, Satyan Lakshminrusimha

Bibliographic record

VenueNeoReviews · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
KeywordsBiostatisticsNonparametric statisticsMedicineStatistical hypothesis testingParametric statisticsStatistical analysisInterpretation (philosophy)Medical physicsTest (biology)Data scienceData miningComputer scienceManagement scienceStatisticsPathologyEpidemiologyMathematicsEngineeringProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Collecting, analyzing, and interpreting data are essential components of biomedical research and require biostatistics. Doing various statistical tests has been made easy by sophisticated computer software. It is important for the investigator and the interpreting clinician to understand the basics of biostatistics for two reasons. The first is to choose the right statistical test for the computer to perform based on the nature of data derived from one's own research. The second is to understand if an analysis was performed appropriately during review and interpretation of others' research. This article reviews the choice of an appropriate parametric or nonparametric statistical test based on type of variable and distribution of data. Evaluation of diagnostic tests is covered with illustrations and tables.

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)0.269
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.351
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.269
Threshold uncertainty score0.901

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2690.351
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.004
Bibliometrics0.0160.017
Science and technology studies0.0040.031
Scholarly communication0.0180.008
Open science0.0070.009
Research integrity0.0090.027
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.010

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 head0.732
GPT teacher head0.572
Teacher spread0.160 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations5
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeoReviewsSame topicClinical Laboratory Practices and Quality ControlFrench-language works237,207