MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2397973008

Children Z-Score Comparability of Bone Mineral Density Reference Databases for

2010· article· en· W2397973008 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Janwillem Kocks, Kate A. Ward, Zahir Mughal, Roy Moncayo, J.E. Adams, Wolfgang Högler

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and osteoporosis research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProspective cohort studyMedicineNuclear medicineInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary of the published pediatric Hologic DXA reference sources for LS and TB BMD with a minimumof 200 white children and adolescents First author(Ref.) Kalkwarf (17) Ward (18) Kelly (19) Ellis (20) a Bachrach(15) b,c Faulkner (16) Country, year USA, 2007 UK, 2007 USA, 2005 USA, 2001 USA, 1999 Canada, 1996Age range (yr) F, 7–16; M, 7–17 5–18 3–20 5–18 8.8–25.9 8–17No. of subjects(females/males)1554 (793/761) 435 (200/235) LS, 1444 (942/502);TB, 1948 (1088/860)982 (537/445) 423 (230/193) 234 (124/110)Hologic model;scan-modeQDR-4500A;QDR-4500W;Delphi-A; all FBQDR Discovery,FBQDR-4500A;Delphi-A; all FBQDR-2000W; PB QDR-1000W; PB QDR-2000; FBSoftware version 11.1 to 12.3(automatic lowbone densitydetection)12.1 (fast arraymode; LS,auto-lowdensityoption; TB,adult analysisalgorithm)12.1 (automaticlow densityanalysis)5.56 (bodycompositionsoftware)6.10 TB, 5.56A; LS,4.42AStudy design Prospective Prospective Prospective Prospective Prospective ProspectiveMulticenter study Yes (5 centers) No Yes (5 centers) No No No

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.147

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0090.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0440.013

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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBone health and osteoporosis research→French-language works237,207→