MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2931519187 · doi:10.1038/s41393-019-0276-2

The challenge of recruitment for neurotherapeutic clinical trials in spinal cord injury

2019· review· en· W2931519187 on OpenAlexafffund
Andrew R. Blight, Jane Hsieh, Armin Curt, James W. Fawcett, James D. Guest, Naomi Kleitman, Shekar N. Kurpad, Brian K. Kwon, Daniel P. Lammertse, Norbert Weidner, John D. Steeves

Bibliographic record

VenueSpinal Cord · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEthics in Clinical Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouver Spine Surgery InstituteInternational Collaboration On Repair Discoveries
FundersRick Hansen InstituteInternational Foundation for Research in ParaplegiaCraig H. Neilsen FoundationMedical Research CouncilChristopher and Dana Reeve Foundation
KeywordsMedicineClinical trialPatient recruitmentSpinal cord injuryNarrative reviewProtocol (science)Physical therapyInclusion and exclusion criteriaPhysical medicine and rehabilitationIntensive care medicineAlternative medicinePsychiatrySpinal cordPathology

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 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)0.147
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.228
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.853
Threshold uncertainty score0.776

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1470.228
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.008
Scholarly communication0.0080.009
Open science0.0040.005
Research integrity0.0100.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.959
GPT teacher head0.766
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
DomainMethods
GenreReview

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

Citations60
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueSpinal CordSame topicEthics in Clinical ResearchFrench-language works237,207