MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2782023683 · doi:10.2217/nmt-2017-0054

Advancing the Understanding of Progression in Multiple Sclerosis: An Interview With Shibeshih Belachew

2018· article· en· W2782023683 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Shibeshih Belachew

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurodegenerative Disease Management · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCenter for Neuroscience ResearchNational Institutes of HealthChildren's National HospitalBiogen
KeywordsLibrary scienceClinical neurologyMedicineMedical educationFamily medicineManagementPsychologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Shibeshih Belachew speaks to Laura Dormer, Commissioning Editor: Dr Shibeshih Belachew, MD, PhD, is a Senior Medical Director for Multiple Sclerosis (MS) Disease Area in Global Product Development Medical Affairs at Roche (Basel, Switzerland). Prior to joining Roche in January 2016, he was Director of MS Franchise and Head of Medical Director's office for Biogen Region Europe and Canada. Previously at Biogen he also served as a Director in Global Neurology for the natalizumab program in Cambridge (MA, USA). Prior to joining industry, he was a Clinical Professor of Neurology at the University of Liège in Belgium. Shibeshih completed neurology postgraduate training at the University of Liège and has a PhD in Biomedical Science in the field of Developmental Neurobiology. Shibeshih has been a post-doctoral fellow in the Laboratory of Cellular and Synaptic Neurophysiology at the National Institutes of Health (Bethesda, MD, USA) and later at the Center for Neuroscience Research of Children's National Medical Center in Washington DC. He is a member of the Belgian Neurological Society.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.092

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.007
Scholarly communication0.0050.012
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0070.032
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.155
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurodegenerative Disease ManagementSame topicMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207