MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2336786343

Las revistas médicas y la metodología de sus escritos. Normas de Vancouver para la publicación de un artículo científico

2007· article· es· W2336786343 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
M C Sosa-de-Martínez, Pablos-Hach Jl, Martínez-Sosa Mc

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Mexicana de Urología · 2007
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth and Medical Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyArt
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

En el segundo tema de esta serie se desarrollaran algunos aspectos de lo que se ha llamado las Normas de Vancouver, es decir los “Requisitos uniformes para preparar los manuscritos que se proponen para publicacion en revistas biomedicas”. En el presente articulo, se narran algunos hechos relevantes sobre el origen de las citadas Normas, se definen los conceptos de par y de revista con revision por pares, se senala brevemente cual es el papel del editor, del dueno de la revista, en que consiste la libertad editorial, asi como aspectos relevantes de la relacion entre el dueno y el editor

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)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.355
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.418
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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Mexicana de UrologíaSame topicHealth and Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207