MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2419248742

Coding of drugs used by respondents of the Canadian Study of Health and Aging.

2002· article· en· W2419248742 on OpenAlexaffabout
Wikke Walop, Marilyn R. Semenchuk

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBiomedical Text Mining and Ontologies
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Population and Public HealthHealth Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFormularyCoding (social sciences)MedicineDiagnosis codeFamily medicineEnvironmental healthStatistics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The Canadian Study of Health and Aging collected verbatim data on the use of medications (drugs) and health products. OBJECTIVE: To describe how the names of drugs and health products are coded and how they can be summarized. METHODS: The data were entered manually into a database. After comparing three coding systems, the drugs and health products were coded using a modification of the American Hospital Formulary Code as temporary codes and the Anatomical, Therapeutic, Chemical Classification as the final codes. CONCLUSION: Coding and input of verbatim drug data are time-consuming, particularly when done manually. Once the coding scheme is in place, the advances in technological aspects of data management greatly improve the process.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.453
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.219 · 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.

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

Citations7
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicBiomedical Text Mining and OntologiesFrench-language works237,207