MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2951984200

Medical Scope:関節リウマチにおける費用対効果評価

2019· article· ja· W2951984200 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
田中 榮一

Bibliographic record

VenuePharma Medica · 2019
Typearticle
Languageja
FieldEngineering
TopicMilitary Technology and Strategies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScope (computer science)Computer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

近年,生物学的製剤の導入により関節リウマチ(RA)の治療戦略は大きく変化し,寛解が現実的な治療目標となったが,一方で,治療の進歩に伴う医療費の高騰は,患者のみならず重要な社会的負担となっている。RAの医療費は,機能障害進行やQOL低下に伴い高額となるため,発症早期からきちんと疾患活動性を抑制できれば,身体機能障害も進まず,結果的に直接費用のみでなく,間接費用も含めた生涯の医療費が軽減する可能性が示唆される。使用する薬剤の臨床的効果と経済的効率の両面を評価し,薬剤費用に見合った価値があるかどうか分析する薬剤経済評価は,わが国でも高騰する医療費の適正化を考えるうえで,その重要性が認識されつつある。

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.250 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePharma MedicaSame topicMilitary Technology and StrategiesFrench-language works237,207