MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2966037930 · doi:10.17294/2330-0698.1712

Celebrating a Quarter-Century of Public Domain Research: 25th Annual Conference of the Health Care Systems Research Network

2019· article· en· W2966037930 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sarah M. Greene, Carolyn Taylor, Suma Vupputuri

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of patient-centered research and reviews · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPrimary Care and Health Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersPatient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute
KeywordsCornerstoneQuarter (Canadian coin)Health careLibrary scienceVariety (cybernetics)Public relationsDiversity (politics)Medical educationPolitical scienceMedicineComputer scienceHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 25th annual conference of the Health Care Systems Research Network (HCSRN) was held April 10-12 in Portland, Oregon, attracting 420 attendees. The HCSRN, a consortium of 18 community-based research organizations embedded in or affiliated with large health care delivery systems, has hosted annual research conferences since 1994. The primary objective of the conference is to convene researchers, project staff, funders, and other stakeholders to share latest scientific findings and cultivate new partnerships among research teams, patients, and clinicians. Collaboration is the cornerstone of the HCSRN's success; the conference serves as a catalyst for a variety of collaborative ventures as well as tactics and approaches to more effective and efficient research. This year's program included 70 distinct scientific presentations, plus nearly 100 posters, and spanned diverse content offerings that mirrored the diversity of the HCSRN and its collaborators. Plenary sessions imparted insights on ways that data science and approaches to collaborative design in health care can speed the translation of research into practice.

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)0.074
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.054
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.391

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0740.054
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.006
Scholarly communication0.0210.011
Open science0.0030.012
Research integrity0.0080.017
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.006

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 head0.327
GPT teacher head0.513
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of patient-centered research and reviewsSame topicPrimary Care and Health OutcomesFrench-language works237,207