MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2789666167 · doi:10.2106/jbjs.16.00723

Global Forum: Spine Research and Training in Underserved, Low and Middle-Income, Culturally Unique Communities: The World Spine Care Charity Research Program’s Challenges and Facilitators

2016· article· en· W2789666167 on OpenAlexaff
O’Dane Brady, Margareta Nordin, Maria Hondras, Geoff Outerbridge, Deborah Kopansky-Giles, Pierre Côté, Sophia da Silva, Timothy Ford, Stefan Eberspaecher, Emre Acaroğlu, Tiro Mmopelwa, Eric L. Hurwitz, Scott Haldeman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bone and Joint Surgery · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Health and Surgery
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech UniversityCanadian Memorial Chiropractic CollegeUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNature versus nurtureBusinessResource (disambiguation)Public relationsTraining (meteorology)Low and middle income countriesMedicinePolitical scienceEconomic growthMedical educationGeographyDeveloping countrySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The World Spine Care (WSC), established by volunteers from 5 continents, is dedicated to providing sustainable, evidence-based spine care to individuals and communities in low and middle-income countries consistent with available health-care resources and integrated within the local culture. The research committee approves and oversees the WSC's collaborative research and training projects worldwide and serves to create a sustainable research community for underserved populations focused on preventing disability from spinal disorders. The purpose of this article is to describe 4 projects overseen by the WSC research committee and to discuss several challenges and specific facilitators that allowed successful completion of initiatives. These novel projects, which involved establishing spine surgery expertise and data collection in the WSC clinics and surrounding communities, all met their aims. This was achieved by overcoming language and resource challenges, adapting to local customs, and taking time to build mutual respect and to nurture relationships with local investigators and stakeholders.

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)0.075
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Incentives · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.925
Threshold uncertainty score0.399

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0750.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0110.008
Scholarly communication0.0080.007
Open science0.0030.019
Research integrity0.0100.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.003

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 head0.231
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.170 · 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
DomainIncentives
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

Citations22
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Bone and Joint SurgerySame topicGlobal Health and SurgeryFrench-language works237,207