MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2613307804 · doi:10.1159/000458727

Conflicts of Interest and the Presence of Methodologists on Guideline Development Panels: A Cross-Sectional Study of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Major Depressive Disorder

2017· letter· en· W2613307804 on OpenAlexaff
Lisa Cosgrove, Allen F. Shaughnessy, Shannon M. Peters, Joel Lexchin, Harold J. Bursztajn, Lisa Bero

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychotherapy and Psychosomatics · 2017
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClinical practice guidelines implementation
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersAgency for Healthcare Research and Quality
KeywordsCross-sectional studyGuidelinePsychologyClinical PracticeMajor depressive disorderMEDLINEPsychiatryClinical psychologyMedicineFamily medicinePolitical scienceCognition

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

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.510
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.678
GPT teacher head0.631
Teacher spread0.047 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations21
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venuePsychotherapy and PsychosomaticsSame topicClinical practice guidelines implementationFrench-language works237,207