MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2798096119 · doi:10.1186/s40409-018-0142-2

Introducing the CONSORT extension to pilot trials: enhancing the design, conduct and reporting of pilot or feasibility trials

2018· editorial· en· W2798096119 on OpenAlexaff
Luciana Patrícia Fernandes Abbade, Joélcio Francisco Abbade, Lehana Thabane

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œJournal of venomous animals and toxins including tropical diseases · 2018
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMeta-analysis and systematic reviews
Canadian institutionsSt. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConsolidated Standards of Reporting TrialsClinical trialPilot trialResearch designMedicineRandomized controlled trialSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This editorial provides a brief overview of the importance of pilot or feasibility trials or studies, the challenges with current practices in their conduct and reporting, an introduction to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) extension to pilot trials aimed at improving their reporting, along with some key resources on aspects related to pilot and feasibility studies.

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)0.387
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.744
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Reporting · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.613
Threshold uncertainty score0.756

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.3870.744
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.008
Bibliometrics0.0080.007
Science and technology studies0.0030.007
Scholarly communication0.0140.009
Open science0.0060.006
Research integrity0.0140.025
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.004

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 head0.840
GPT teacher head0.568
Teacher spread0.272 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
DomainReporting
GenreEditorial

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

Citations38
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œJournal of venomous animals and toxins including tropical diseasesSame topicMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsFrench-language works237,207