MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2896537297 · doi:10.1016/j.ejps.2018.10.019

Summary report of second EUFEPS/AAPS conference on global harmonization in bioequivalence

2018· article· en· W2896537297 on OpenAlexaff
Mei‐Ling Chen, Henning Blume, Gerald Beuerle, Henrike Potthast, Andreas Brandt, Barbara Schug, Murray P. Ducharme, László Endrényi, Keith Gallicano, Donald J. Schuirmann, Jan Welink

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods in Clinical Trials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBioequivalenceHarmonizationBiopharmaceuticsPolitical scienceStandardizationMedicinePharmacologyBusinessBioavailabilityChemistryLaw

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)0.061
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.044
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.323

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0610.044
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0090.004
Open science0.0050.005
Research integrity0.0170.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.007

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 head0.687
GPT teacher head0.599
Teacher spread0.088 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations13
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Pharmaceutical SciencesSame topicStatistical Methods in Clinical TrialsFrench-language works237,207