MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2921397402 · doi:10.1212/cpj.0000000000000615

Headache

2019· article· en· W2921397402 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jennifer Robblee, Shawna Kelly

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurology Clinical Practice · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical and Biological Sciences
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDowntownPsychologyWord (group theory)Period (music)MedicineLinguisticsAestheticsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new headache clinic in a Canadian downtown quaternary neurological center aimed at supporting clinicians in the community was opened in March 2017. As a means to help appreciate a patient's unique experience of pain, an initially therapeutic history-taking tool has blossomed into a visual tool to advocate, educate, and communicate their headache experience. Over a 10-month period, we asked 375 patients the question, what is the one word you use to describe your headache pain or experience? From this question, we derived 171 unique words with many recurring word themes showing shared experience (table). These words were recorded in this illustration with increasing font size to represent the frequency of each word (figure). Fun fact—paying homage to the brain, particular words are intentionally placed near the control centers!

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 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)0.016
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.628
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.004

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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.463
Teacher spread0.337 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurology Clinical PracticeSame topicMedical and Biological SciencesFrench-language works237,207