MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2767986930 · doi:10.1186/s12917-017-1235-9

Letter to the editor - round table unites totackle culture change in an effort to improve animal research reporting

2017· letter· en· W2767986930 on OpenAlexaff
Nikki Osborne, Merel Ritskes‐Hoitinga, Amrita Ahluwahlia, Sabina Alam, Matthew T. Brown, Hayley Henderson, Wim de Leeuw, Joan Marsh, David Moher, Erica van Oort, Frances Rawle, Beat M. Riederer, José M. Sánchez-Morgado, Emily S. Sena, Caroline Struthers, Matthew Westmore, Marc T. Avey, Rony Kalman, Annette M. O’Connor, Jan M. Sargeant, Anja Petrie, A. J. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Veterinary Research · 2017
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal testing and alternatives
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphOttawa Hospital
FundersMedical Research CouncilNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsRound tableStatement (logic)Table (database)Quality (philosophy)Culture changePublic relationsMedical educationPolitical scienceMedicineComputer scienceSociologySocial scienceSession (web analytics)Data miningWorld Wide WebLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A round table discussion was held during the LAVA-ESLAV-ECLAM conference on Reproducibility of Animal Studies on the 25th of September 2017 in Edinburgh. The aim of the round table was to discuss how to enhance the rate at which the quality of reporting animal research can be improved. This signed statement acknowledges the efforts that participant organizations have made towards improving the reporting of animal studies and confirms an ongoing commitment to drive further improvements, calling upon both academics and laboratory animal veterinarians to help make this cultural change.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.324
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0010.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.653
GPT teacher head0.562
Teacher spread0.091 · 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
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 venueBMC Veterinary ResearchSame topicAnimal testing and alternativesFrench-language works237,207