MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2902223789 · doi:10.1111/pcn.12804

Effect of probiotic interventions on depressive symptoms: A narrative review evaluating systematic reviews

2018· review· en· W2902223789 on OpenAlexafffund
Nadeem Ibrahim, Mohammed Ziaur Rahman, Yasser Ad-Dab’bagh, Mahmood Akhtar

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGut microbiota and health
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of OttawaHamilton Health Sciences
FundersMcMaster University
KeywordsProbioticPsychological interventionSystematic reviewMedicineMental healthDepression (economics)Randomized controlled trialNarrative reviewClinical trialPopulationMEDLINEAlternative medicinePsychiatryClinical psychologyIntensive care medicineInternal medicinePathologyEnvironmental healthBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OpenAlex records an abstract for this work, but it could not be fetched just now.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.034
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.034
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.007
Bibliometrics0.0080.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.527
Teacher spread0.403 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations60
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences→Same topicGut microbiota and health→French-language works237,207→