MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3009741491 · doi:10.1016/j.eclinm.2020.100305

Putting gender into sex- and gender-sensitive medicine

2020· article· en· W3009741491 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sabine Oertelt‐Prigione

Bibliographic record

VenueEClinicalMedicine · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSex and Gender in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersStiftung CharitéHans Böckler StiftungBundesministerium für GesundheitBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungZonMw
KeywordsScopusMedicinePublicationAlternative medicineGender equityLibrary scienceMEDLINEFamily medicinePolitical scienceGender studiesSociologyLawPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The case for sex- and gender-sensitivity in (bio)medicine and health is becoming more and more compelling. Funding agencies in Europe [1], Canada [2] and the USA [3] are requesting that sex and/or gender be considered in grant applications. Scientific journals [4,5] increasingly embrace the need to publish sex-disaggregated data. Even scientific societies are supporting the subject [6]. Yet, our everyday practice is still very far from being sex-sensitive, let alone gender-sensitive.

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)0.035
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.065
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.187

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0350.065
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.046
Scholarly communication0.0130.014
Open science0.0020.009
Research integrity0.0170.023
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.004

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 head0.263
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.175 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations30
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEClinicalMedicineSame topicSex and Gender in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207