MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2502769963 · doi:10.1017/s1466252316000128

Introducing a special issue with a focus on systematic reviews

2016· article· en· W2502769963 on OpenAlexaff
Jan M. Sargeant, Annette M. O’Connor

Bibliographic record

VenueAnimal Health Research Reviews · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMeta-analysis and systematic reviews
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSystematic reviewNarrative reviewScope (computer science)Transparency (behavior)Management scienceEngineering ethicsComputer scienceMEDLINEData sciencePsychologyMedicinePolitical scienceEngineeringPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Systematic reviews answer specific review questions by following structured steps and employing specific methods to reduce the risk of bias and to maximize transparency in the process of the review, and systematic review methodology differs from traditional narrative reviews in many ways. As a journal devoted to reviews, it is appropriate that Animal Health Research Reviews (AHRR) includes this approach to reviews of the literature. The aim of this special issue of AHRR was to illustrate the scope of articles that can be considered for submission to the systematic review section of this journal for prospective authors and readers.

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)0.032
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.141
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.968
Threshold uncertainty score0.171

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0320.141
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.008
Bibliometrics0.0130.006
Science and technology studies0.0040.008
Scholarly communication0.0170.015
Open science0.0040.009
Research integrity0.0260.030
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0260.011

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 head0.892
GPT teacher head0.645
Teacher spread0.247 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
DomainMethods
GenreEditorial

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnimal Health Research ReviewsSame topicMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsFrench-language works237,207