MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2923388716 · doi:10.1186/s40814-019-0423-8

A guide to the reporting of protocols of pilot and feasibility trials

2019· editorial· en· W2923388716 on OpenAlexaff
Lehana Thabane, Gillian Lancaster

Bibliographic record

VenuePilot and Feasibility Studies · 2019
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMeta-analysis and systematic reviews
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityImpact
FundersKeele UniversityUniversity of OxfordNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchQueen Mary University of London
KeywordsProtocol (science)Clinical trialConsolidated Standards of Reporting TrialsGuidelineTransparency (behavior)Pilot trialMedical physicsMedicineComputer scienceAlternative medicineRandomized controlled trialSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Publishing protocols of trials including protocols of pilot and feasibility trials—designed to inform the designs of main trials—has been advocated as an important strategy towards improving transparency in the conduct and reporting of main trials and pilot/feasibility trials. This editorial aims to provide some general guidance on how to report protocols of pilot and feasibility trials, drawing upon two available resources—the CONSORT extension to pilot trials and the SPIRIT guideline for main trials. We describe how these might be adapted for the reporting of protocol manuscripts of pilot and feasibility trials for submission in Pilot and Feasibility Studies journal.

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)0.218
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.448
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Reporting · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.782
Threshold uncertainty score0.964

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2180.448
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.004
Bibliometrics0.0120.007
Science and technology studies0.0030.007
Scholarly communication0.0100.008
Open science0.0070.005
Research integrity0.0120.029
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0260.052

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 head0.929
GPT teacher head0.662
Teacher spread0.266 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
DomainReporting
GenreEditorial

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

Citations245
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePilot and Feasibility StudiesSame topicMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsFrench-language works237,207