MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2520959847 · doi:10.1016/j.neuro.2016.09.001

Severity scoring of manganese health effects for categorical regression

2016· review· en· W2520959847 on OpenAlexaff
Donald R. Mattison, Brittany Milton, Daniel Krewski, Len Levy, David C. Dorman, Peter Aggett, Harry A. Roels, Melvin E. Andersen, Nataliya A. Karyakina, Natalia S. Shilnikova, Siva Ramoju, Doreen McGough

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroToxicology · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHeavy Metal Exposure and Toxicity
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Population and Public HealthUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCategorical variableRegressionRegression analysisPopulationStatisticsMedicineEnvironmental healthMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Characterizing the U-shaped exposure response relationship for manganese (Mn) is necessary for estimating the risk of adverse health from Mn toxicity due to excess or deficiency. Categorical regression has emerged as a powerful tool for exposure-response analysis because of its ability to synthesize relevant information across multiple studies and species into a single integrated analysis of all relevant data. This paper documents the development of a database on Mn toxicity designed to support the application of categorical regression techniques. Specifically, we describe (i) the conduct of a systematic search of the literature on Mn toxicity to gather data appropriate for dose-response assessment; (ii) the establishment of inclusion/exclusion criteria for data to be included in the categorical regression modeling database; (iii) the development of a categorical severity scoring matrix for Mn health effects to permit the inclusion of diverse health outcomes in a single categorical regression analysis using the severity score as the outcome variable; and (iv) the convening of an international expert panel to both review the severity scoring matrix and assign severity scores to health outcomes observed in studies (including case reports, epidemiological investigations, and in vivo experimental studies) selected for inclusion in the categorical regression database. Exposure information including route, concentration, duration, health endpoint(s), and characteristics of the exposed population was abstracted from included studies and stored in a computerized manganese database (MnDB), providing a comprehensive repository of exposure-response information with the ability to support categorical regression modeling of oral exposure data.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.995
Threshold uncertainty score0.886

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.327 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations32
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroToxicologySame topicHeavy Metal Exposure and ToxicityFrench-language works237,207