MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2989988376 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2019-033421

Journal editors’ perspectives on the roles and tasks of peer reviewers in biomedical journals: a qualitative study

2019· article· en· W2989988376 on OpenAlexaff
Ketevan Glonti, Isabelle Boutron, David Moher, Darko Hren

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
Topicscientometrics and bibliometrics research
Canadian institutionsOttawa Hospital
FundersH2020 Marie Skłodowska-Curie ActionsEuropean Commission
KeywordsPeer reviewReputationContext (archaeology)Qualitative researchSpecialtyPrestigePublishingMedicineMedical educationSocial scienceSociologyFamily medicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OpenAlex records an abstract for this work, but it could not be fetched just now.

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)0.047
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.106
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Evaluation · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score0.250

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0470.106
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.009
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.724
GPT teacher head0.704
Teacher spread0.019 · 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 designQualitative
DomainEvaluation
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

Citations73
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicscientometrics and bibliometrics researchFrench-language works237,207