MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2810830875 · doi:10.1016/j.jval.2018.04.094

Approaches for Estimating the Comparative Efficacy of Treatments for Patients with Recurrent Small Cell Lung Cancer (SCLC) within Connected and Disconnected Networks of Evidence

2018· article· en· W2810830875 on OpenAlexaff
Shannon Cope, ST Keeping, Melissa Barazandegan, D. Ayers, JP Jansen, JR Penrod, Beata Korytowsky, Ariadna Juarez García, Yong Yuan

Bibliographic record

VenueValue in Health · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Research Studies
Canadian institutionsPrecision Nanosystems (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTopotecanMedicineNivolumabInternal medicineOncologyIpilimumabRandomized controlled trialHazard ratioChemotherapyCancerConfidence intervalImmunotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.103
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.359
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.897
Threshold uncertainty score0.543

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1030.359
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.006
Bibliometrics0.0130.011
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0070.008
Open science0.0060.007
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.268
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.161 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
DomainMethods
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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueValue in HealthSame topicLung Cancer Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207