Editorial for issue 1 of 2011, Journal of Evidence Based Medicine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In welcoming you to this New Year and a new volume for the Journal of Evidence Based Medicine, we are delighted to announce two major developments for the Journal and for evidence based health care more generally. Firstly, on January 24 2011, the Executive Board of the World Health Organisation (WHO) approved the application from The Cochrane Collaboration to become a Non-Governmental Organisation in Official Relations with the WHO. This recognises the importance of the Collaboration and of systematic reviews, in providing evidence to inform decisions in health care, including those that have to be made to cope with the aftermath of natural disasters. It allows the Collaboration to participate in the World Health Assembly and to have input to WHO resolutions. Our second piece of good news is more local. Following a formal submission to the US National Library of Medicine in 2010, it has been agreed that the Journal of Evidence Based Medicine will be indexed in MEDLINE from this year. This is testament to the high quality of the articles sent to us during the years since the Journal was established in 2008, and to the importance of this material for the wider health and healthcare community. We look forward to the first records for the Journal appearing in MEDLINE shortly and are pleased to present you with a collection of articles in this issue that are likely to prove influential in the future. Among these is an update of an article that she wrote for the Chinese Journal of Evidence Based Medicine five years ago (1) in which Claire Allen from The Cochrane Collaboration Secretariat has teamed up with her colleague Kiley Richmond to describe global activity within the Collaboration. In 2006, the Collaboration had 15,000 active participants in 97 countries. By 2010, this had grown to 28,000 people in 112 countries. More than 21,000 of these people are involved as authors of Cochrane reviews, driving the number of full reviews produced since the Collaboration was established 17 years ago through 4500. The international perspective is also present in a report comparing policies and regulations of healthcare risk management agencies and non-governmental organizations in Australia, Canada, Taiwan district, UK and USA. Bin Ma and colleagues from Lanzhou University in China tackle the global problem of tuberculosis drug resistance with a review and meta-analysis of research into a diagnostic test to detect resistance to rifampicin. In another article, you will find a study of more than 20,000 users of intrauterine devices in 236 towns in Jiangsu, Shanghai, Guangdong, Anhui, Sichuan, and Chongqing provinces in China, examining the association between regional economic levels and adverse effects. We hope that you will enjoy and appreciate these and the other articles in this issue of the Journal, and those still to come, through 2011.
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
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 arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Editorial About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Not applicable | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Editorial About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Not applicable | high |
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.060 | 0.271 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
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".