MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2735844891 · doi:10.2105/ajph.2017.303880

Princess Diana and Reduced Traffic Deaths in France and the United States

2017· editorial· en· W2735844891 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Donald A. Redelmeier, Junaid A. Bhatti

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Public Health · 2017
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicGlobal Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsFamily medicineChristian ministryLibrary scienceMedicineGerontologyPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Princess Diana and Reduced Traffic Deaths in France and the United States Affiliation Donald A. Redelmeier MD, MSHSR, FACP, and Junaid A. Bhatti MBBS, MSc, PhDDonald A. Redelmeier is with the Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, and the Evaluative Clinical Sciences Program, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Junaid A. Bhatti is with the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences and the Department of Surgery, University of Toronto.CopyRightCorrespondence should be sent to Donald A. Redelmeier, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, G-151, 2075 Bayview Ave, Ontario, Canada M4N 3M5 (e-mail: [email protected]on.ca). Reprints can be ordered at http://www.ajph.org by clicking the "Reprints" link.Note. The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Ontario Ministry of Health & Long-Term Care.CONTRIBUTORSD. A. Redelmeier wrote the first draft of the editorial. Both authors contributed to revisions and the final decision to submit for publication. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2017.303880 Accepted: April 28, 2017 Published Online: July 12, 2017

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)0.025
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: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0060.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.303 · 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
GenreEditorial

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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Public HealthSame topicGlobal Public Health Policies and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207