MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Authors seldom report the most patient-important outcomes and absolute effect measures in systematic review abstracts

2016· review· en· W2517520435 on OpenAlexafffund
Arnav Agarwal, Bradley C. Johnston, Robin W.M. Vernooij, Alonso Carrasco‐Labra, Romina Brignardello‐Petersen, Ignacio Neumann, Elie A. Akl, Xin Sun, Matthias Briel, Jason W. Busse, Shanil Ebrahim, Carlos Granados, Alfonso Iorio, Affan Irfan, Laura Martínez García, Reem A. Mustafa, Anggie Ramírez-Morera, Anna Selva, Iván Solà, Andrea J. Sanabrai, Kari A.O. Tikkinen, Per Olav Vandvik, Oscar E. Zazueta, Qi Zhou, Holger J. Schünemann, Gordon Guyatt, Pablo Alonso‐Coello

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Epidemiology · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMeta-analysis and systematic reviews
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenCanada Research ChairsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineSystematic reviewMEDLINERelative riskAbsolute risk reductionMeta-analysisCochrane LibraryAbsolute (philosophy)Family medicineConfidence intervalInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmaMetaresearch
Domain: Reporting · Genre: Review
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Systematic reviewlow
gptMetaresearchScholarly communication
Domain: Reporting · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationalhigh
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.180
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.703
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Reporting · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.820
Threshold uncertainty score0.954

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1800.703
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0200.028
Bibliometrics0.0310.017
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0080.010
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0050.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.859
GPT teacher head0.671
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

MetaresearchScholarly communication

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designSystematic review · Observational
DomainReporting
GenreReview · Empirical

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

Citations41
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical EpidemiologySame topicMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsCategoryMetaresearchFrench-language works237,207