MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3012517977 · doi:10.1016/s1474-4422(20)30067-3

Timing of high-efficacy therapy for multiple sclerosis: a retrospective observational cohort study

2020· article· en· W3012517977 on OpenAlexaff
Anna He, B. Merkel, J William L Brown, Lana Zhovits Ryerson, Ilya Kister, Charles B. Malpas, Sifat Sharmin, Dana Horáková, Eva Havrdová, Tim Spelman, Guillermo Izquierdo, Sara Eichau, María Trojano, Alessandra Lugaresi, Raymond Hupperts, Patrizia Sola, Diana Ferraro, Jan Lycke, François Grand’Maison, Alexandre Prat, Marc Girard, Pierre Duquette, Catherine Larochelle, Anders Svenningsson, Thor Petersen, Pierre Grammond, Franco Granella, Vincent Van Pesch, Roberto Bergamaschi, Christopher McGuigan, Alasdair Coles, Jan Hillert, Fredrik Piehl, Helmut Butzkueven, Tomáš Kalinčík

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet Neurology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsCentre intégré de santé et de services sociaux de Chaudière-AppalachesHôpital Notre-DameUniversité de Montréal
FundersNational Health and Medical Research CouncilSanofi GenzymeSveriges Kommuner och LandstingNIHR Cambridge Biomedical Research CentreRocheMultiple Sclerosis SocietyBiogenNovartisMerck
KeywordsObservational studyRetrospective cohort studyMedicineMultiple sclerosisCohortCohort studyInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.302
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.064 · 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

Citations438
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueThe Lancet NeurologySame topicMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207