MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2995550504 · doi:10.1183/16000617.0128-2019

Pulmonary arterial hypertension registries: past, present and into the future

2019· editorial· en· W2995550504 on OpenAlexaff
Jason Weatherald, Abílio Reis, Olivier Sitbon, Marc Humbert

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Respiratory Review · 2019
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPulmonary Hypertension Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsLibin Cardiovascular Institute of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEpidemiologyIntensive care medicineFace (sociological concept)Big dataMedical emergencyInternal medicineData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Registries have greatly contributed to knowledge about PAH epidemiology, risk factors, prognosis and treatment. Future registries face unique challenges but may benefit from integration of multiple data sources and capitalising on “Big Data” opportunities.http://bit.ly/2OBpapG

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.039
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: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.039
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.008
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0140.016
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.013

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.295
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; 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
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

Citations12
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Respiratory ReviewSame topicPulmonary Hypertension Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207