MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2584859108 · doi:10.1177/2380084417691722

Building Oral Health Research Capacity in India: Identifying Barriers and Enablers Using Mixed Methods

2017· article· en· W2584859108 on OpenAlexaff
Mohd Masood, Tim Newton, Om Prakash Kharbanda, Yaghma Masood, J.S. Feine, Mark Gussy, Satu Lahti

Bibliographic record

VenueJDR Clinical & Translational Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Health and Care Utilization
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersIndian Council of Medical ResearchInternational Association for Dental Research
KeywordsOral healthCapacity buildingKnowledge transferStatement (logic)Technology transferKnowledge managementBusinessMedicinePolitical scienceComputer scienceFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Knowledge Transfer Statement: This article will provide a brief overview of the methods in finding barriers and enablers in doing oral health research in India. This mixed-methods approach can be used by researchers in finding barriers and enablers in doing oral health research in other developing countries and building oral health research capacities.

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)0.077
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.072
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.077
Threshold uncertainty score0.406

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0770.072
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0030.011
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.746
GPT teacher head0.679
Teacher spread0.067 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJDR Clinical & Translational ResearchSame topicDental Health and Care UtilizationFrench-language works237,207