MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2905976337 · doi:10.1016/j.jval.2018.09.462

PCN380 - THE PROGNOSTIC SIGNIFICANCE OF HEALTH-RELATED QUALITY OF LIFE FROM CANCER RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS: A SYSTEMATIC EVALUATION OF THE STATISTICAL METHODS

2018· article· en· W2905976337 on OpenAlexaff
Justyna Mierzynska, Madeline Pe, Claire Piccinin, Francesca Martinelli, Corneel Coens, Carolyn Gotay, Mogens Grønvold, Kristin Bjordal, Galina Velikova, K Tomaszewski, Andrew Bottomley

Bibliographic record

VenueValue in Health · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineUnivariateSample size determinationRandomized controlled trialMissing dataMultivariate analysisQuality of life (healthcare)Multivariate statisticsSystematic reviewMEDLINEInternal medicineStatisticsMathematics

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmaMetaresearch
Domain: Methods · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Theoretical or conceptuallow
gptMetaresearch
Domain: Methods · Genre: Review
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Other designlow
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.198
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.382
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.802
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1980.382
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0140.033
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0040.007
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 head0.669
GPT teacher head0.551
Teacher spread0.118 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

Metaresearch

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual · Other design
DomainMethods
GenreEmpirical · Review

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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueValue in HealthSame topicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeCategoryMetaresearchFrench-language works237,207