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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To investigate the disparities of perioperative diabetes management strategies through a comparative analysis of both domestic and overseas guidelines.Methods The latest(until April 1st,2009) diabetes guidelines were obtained through a combination of electronic and manual search of the PubMed,CBMDisc database and Google.Results A total of 8 guidelines out of the 12 guidelines aquired were enrolled for the comparative analysis,based on their inclusion and exclusion criteria.Conclusion On the whole,guidelines of ADA(the American Diabetes Association),IDF(the International Diabetes Federation),Canadian Diabetes Association(CDA),Massachusetts,and Chinese Medical Association tend to be more comprehensive,which in turn can serve as programmatic guidance.However,these guidelines can′t be used as implementing guidance due to the lack of flow charts.On the other hand,guidelines of Joslin,Rush and Yale provide more details concerning perioperative management of diabetic patients,including detailed flow charts and may be more practical as clinical guidance.Medical institutions at home may work out perioperative diabetes management guidelines to fit their specific situations with the references of the above guidelines.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it