MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Roteiro para relato de estudos de avaliação econômica

2017· article· pt· W2779380288 on OpenAlexaff
Everton Nunes da Silva, Marcus Tolentino Silva, Federico Augustovski, Don Husereau, Maurício Gomes Pereira

Bibliographic record

VenueEpidemiologia e Serviços de Saúde · 2017
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicBusiness and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ao longo desta série sobre avaliação econômica, foram apresentadas várias etapas metodológicas de como conduzir estudos de custo-efetividade. Foram discutidas abordagens para estimar custos e desfechos em saúde, modelos analíticos para informar decisões sobre o uso de tecnologias, formas de lidar com a incerteza e como estimar o impacto orçamentário. Cada uma destas etapas requer a definição de métodos, coleta de dados e análise dos resultados. Nesse sentido, relatar avaliação econômica é um desafio, dado o conjunto abrangente de informações relevantes para a compreensão do estudo e a restrição de espaço nas revistas científicas.

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)0.058
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.170
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Reporting · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.942
Threshold uncertainty score0.306

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0580.170
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.0160.024
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0100.007
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.236
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.191 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
DomainReporting
GenreMethods

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

Citations7
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEpidemiologia e Serviços de SaúdeSame topicBusiness and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207