MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2740742474 · doi:10.2139/ssrn.2634657

Rapport Final - Le mmdecin face aux nouvelles technologies dans le domaine mmdical: nouvelles responsabilitts? (Final Report Physicians and Emerging Technologies in the Medical Field: New Responsibilities?)

2012· article· en· W2740742474 on OpenAlexaff
Adrian Thorogood, Amélie Rioux, Claudine Fecteau, Daniel Sinnett, Emily Kirby, Gale Stewart, Guillaume Sillon, Gurit Lotan, Jean-Marie Therrien, Linda Furlini, Ma’n H. Zawati, Nadine Dumas, Nathalie Bolduc, Pavel Hamet, Sabrina Fortin, Shant Der Sarkissian, Sonia Nizard, Zaki El Haffaf

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBiomedical Ethics and Regulation
Canadian institutionsMinistère de la Santé et des Services Sociaux (Québec)Montreal General HospitalUniversité LavalUniversité de MontréalUniversité du Québec à MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineMcGill UniversityMcGill University and Génome Québec Innovation Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesPhilosophy

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.601
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.005
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicBiomedical Ethics and RegulationFrench-language works237,207