MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2395058575

The role of professional journalism in protecting against questionable practice.

2003· article· en· W2395058575 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
John O’Keefe

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDental Education, Practice, Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJournalismPublicationOrder (exchange)Public relationsDental practiceProfessional standardsProfessional associationEngineering ethicsEthical standardsAssociation (psychology)Clinical PracticePolitical scienceMedicineMedical educationBusinessPsychologyLawNursingEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The editor in chief of the Journal of the Canadian Dental Association explains that professional journalism alone cannot be expected to protect against questionable practice but it plays a vital role in the network of resources that define standards of excellent and ethical care. According to some, the explosion of biomedical information has created a crisis as emerging science overwhelms practitioners' capacity to intelligently evaluate it and incorporate it into practice. Research in medicine shows that journals play only a part in decisions regarding practice patterns. Some initiatives taken by the Canadian Dental Association to publish professional literature relevant to practitioners' needs to remain current in order to prevent questionable dental practice are described.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.419
Threshold uncertainty score0.971

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.390 · 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.

Study designObservational
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
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicDental Education, Practice, ResearchFrench-language works237,207