MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2901946954 · doi:10.1016/j.jand.2018.09.005

Establishing Validity and Cross-Context Equivalence of Measures and Indicators

2018· article· en· W2901946954 on OpenAlexaff
Edward A. Frongillo, Tom Baranowski, Amy F. Subar, Janet A. Tooze, Sharon I. Kirkpatrick

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFood Security and Health in Diverse Populations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersAgricultural Research ServiceU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsEquivalence (formal languages)Measure (data warehouse)Computer scienceContext (archaeology)Data miningMathematics

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)0.115
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.400
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.115
Threshold uncertainty score0.607

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1150.400
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.007
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0020.003
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 head0.246
GPT teacher head0.480
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations77
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Academy of Nutrition and DieteticsSame topicFood Security and Health in Diverse PopulationsFrench-language works237,207