MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2902659609 · doi:10.1007/s00268-018-4868-3

Developing Metrics to Define Progress in Children’s Surgery

2018· review· en· W2902659609 on OpenAlexaff
Dan Poenaru, Justina O. Seyi‐Olajide

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Surgery · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Health and Surgery
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreMontreal Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPediatric surgeryMedicineVascular surgerySpecialtyCardiothoracic surgeryCardiac surgeryQuality (philosophy)SurgeryFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is a need for relevant, valid, and practical metrics to better quantify both need and progress in global pediatric surgery and for monitoring systems performance. There are several existing surgical metrics in use, including disability-adjusted life years (DALYs), surgical backlog, effective coverage, cost-effectiveness, and the Lancet Commission on Global Surgery indicators. Most of these have, however, not been yet applied to children's surgery, leaving therefore significant data gaps in the burden of disease, infrastructure, human resources, and quality of care assessments in the specialty. This chapter reviews existing global surgical metrics, identifies settings where these have been already applied to children's surgery, and highlights opportunities for further inquiry in filling the knowledge gaps. Directing focused, intentional knowledge translation efforts in the identified areas of deficiency will foster the maturation of global pediatric surgery into a solid academic discipline able to contribute directly to the cause of improving the lives of children around the world.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.046
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Evaluation · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.046
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0120.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.122
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 designNot applicable
DomainEvaluation
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

Citations9
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of SurgerySame topicGlobal Health and SurgeryFrench-language works237,207