MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2780741798 · doi:10.1177/1077800417744580

IRB as Poetry

2017· article· en· W2780741798 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Maria K. E. Lahman, Eric D. Teman, Veronica M. Richard

Bibliographic record

VenueQualitative Inquiry · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChildren's Rights and Participation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of WyomingUniversity of Northern ColoradoConcordia UniversityUniversity of Chicago
KeywordsPoetryTransgenderQueerLesbianAutoethnographyGender studiesSociologyLiteratureArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this series of poems, the authors reflexively explore experiences with the institutional review board (IRB) through the use of various poetic forms, including autoethnographic, literature review, artifact, blackout, typewriter, concrete, cutout, photographic, and collage. Areas of the authors’ individual research lines are with children, adolescents, and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, questioning, and ally (LGBTQQA+) participants, which are groups federally designated as vulnerable in research. Author experiences with these groups are reflected in the poetry and the perspectives of being reviewed by, reviewers of, and chairs of IRB.

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)0.052
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.132
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.990
Threshold uncertainty score0.274

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0520.132
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0100.012
Scholarly communication0.0150.009
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0030.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0520.032

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 head0.275
GPT teacher head0.560
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations33
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQualitative InquirySame topicChildren's Rights and ParticipationFrench-language works237,207