MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2916292135 · doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2018.10.046

A multicenter randomized controlled study to evaluate whether neuromuscular electrical stimulation improves the absolute walking distance in patients with intermittent claudication compared with best available treatment

2019· article· en· W2916292135 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Rebecca Lawton, Adarsh Babber, B.D. Braithwaite, Laura Burgess, Ian Chetter, James Coulston, David Epstein, Francesca Fiorentino, Manjit Gohel, Francine Heatley, Robert J. Hinchliffe, Sarah Horgan, Nandita Pal, Joseph Shalhoub, Richard Simpson, Gerard Stansby, Alun H. Davies

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vascular Surgery · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPeripheral Artery Disease Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEfficacy and Mechanism Evaluation ProgrammeMedical Research Council CanadaNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialPhysical therapyIntermittent claudicationClaudicationPsychological interventionPhysical medicine and rehabilitationQuality of life (healthcare)Clinical trialTreadmillElectrical muscle stimulationSurgeryStimulationArterial diseaseVascular diseaseNursingInternal medicine

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.471

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations8
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Vascular SurgerySame topicPeripheral Artery Disease ManagementFrench-language works237,207