[The forgotten capitulation of evidence-based medicine].
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1992, the Canadian physician Gordon Guyatt wrote an article that is generally regarded as the starting point of evidence-based medicine (EBM). He described the ideas behind the McMaster residency programme for 'evidence-based practitioners', founded by David Sackett. Eight years later, in 2000, Guyatt concluded that this programme was too ambitious. In a new publication he described most doctors as 'evidence-users'. This editorial marks the transition from an individual to a collective form of EBM, emphasizing the use of evidence-based guidelines. The starting point of this collective form of EBM is not the well-known 1992 paper, but the forgotten editorial in 2000, which was described by Guyatt's colleagues as the capitulation of EBM.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.032 | 0.144 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.012 | 0.025 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.006 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".