MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Reporting scoping reviews—PRISMA ScR extension

2020· article· en· W3012971470 on OpenAlexaff
Jessie McGowan, Sharon E. Straus, David Moher, Étienne V Langlois, Kelly K. O’Brien, Tanya Horsley, Adrian Aldcroft, Wasifa Zarin, Chantelle Marie Garitty, Susanne Hempel, Erin Lillie, Özge Tunçalp, Andrea C. Tricco

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Epidemiology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMeta-analysis and systematic reviews
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreRoyal College of Physicians and Surgeons of CanadaUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science CentreToronto Rehabilitation InstituteOttawa HospitalSt. Michael's HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
FundersWorld Health Organization
KeywordsDisseminationReliability (semiconductor)Extension (predicate logic)Work (physics)PsychologyPublic relationsActuarial scienceComputer scienceBusinessPolitical scienceEngineering

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)0.275
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.620
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Reporting · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.725
Threshold uncertainty score0.894

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2750.620
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0070.013
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0160.032
Bibliometrics0.0250.027
Science and technology studies0.0040.006
Scholarly communication0.0130.008
Open science0.0080.018
Research integrity0.0090.017
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2070.048

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 head0.984
GPT teacher head0.748
Teacher spread0.236 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
DomainReporting
GenreMethods

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

Citations469
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical EpidemiologySame topicMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsFrench-language works237,207