MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2515015639 · doi:10.1186/s12913-016-1682-1

Erratum to: Development of a nurse home visitation intervention for intimate partner violence

2016· erratum· en· W2515015639 on OpenAlexaff
Susan M. Jack, Marilyn Ford‐Gilboe, C. Nadine Wathen, Danielle M. Davidov, Diane B. McNaughton, Jeffrey H. Coben, David L. Olds, Harriet L. MacMillan

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Health Services Research · 2016
Typeerratum
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntimate Partner and Family Violence
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityMcMaster University
FundersUniversity of Colorado School of Medicine, Anschutz Medical CampusNational Institute of General Medical Sciences
KeywordsGeneral partnershipNursing researchNursingDomestic violenceIntervention (counseling)Health administrationMedicineHealth informaticsStatement (logic)Center (category theory)Public healthPoison controlSuicide preventionPolitical scienceMedical emergencyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For full transparency, the authors wish to update the competing interest statement of this article [1] with the following information: The Prevention Research Center for Family and Child Health (PRC), directed by Dr. David Olds at the University of Colorado School of Medicine, has a contract with the Nurse-Family Partnership© to conduct research to improve the NFP program and its implementation. Dr. David Olds was employed by this center at the time the current study was conducted. The contract with the NFP contributes to the salaries and operations of the PRC. Dr. Olds is the founder of the Nurse-Family Partnership [1] Jack, et al. Development of a nurse home visitation intervention for intimate partner violence. BMC Health Services Research. 2012;12:50. doi:10.1186/1472-6963-12-50. Language: en

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.064
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.275

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.064
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0050.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0820.027

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.478
Teacher spread0.410 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Health Services Research→Same topicIntimate Partner and Family Violence→French-language works237,207→