MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2335702403 · doi:10.1097/bpo.0b013e31825199fa

Evidence-based Pediatric Orthopaedics

2012· article· en· W2335702403 on OpenAlexaff
James G. Wright, Mininder S. Kocher, James O. Sanders

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pediatric Orthopaedics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHip disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of TorontoSickKids Foundation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineConfoundingEvidence-based medicineMEDLINEQuality (philosophy)Clinical study designMedical educationAlternative medicineClinical trialPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Evidence-based medicine carefully assesses the information available in the literature by assessing both the results and the quality of the underlying studies. Studies are prone to both confounding and bias, and practitioners need to have a basic knowledge of how these factors are affected by various study types. This paper addresses the issues facing various study designs with the goal of helping practitioners understand what they can actually learn from different study designs.

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)0.028
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.165
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 score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.148

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0280.165
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0090.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0050.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.003

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pediatric OrthopaedicsSame topicHip disorders and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207