MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3016709664 · doi:10.1016/j.ajem.2019.12.030

Evaluation of intervention reporting in published emergency medicine clinical trials

2020· article· en· W3016709664 on OpenAlexaff
Ian Fladie, Drayton Rorah, Jonathan Pollard, Samuel Jellison, Lehana Thabane, Kelly Murray, Gavin Gardner, Matt Vassar

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Emergency Medicine · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMeta-analysis and systematic reviews
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityImpact
FundersOklahoma Center for the Advancement of Science and Technology
KeywordsChecklistMedicineIntervention (counseling)MEDLINERandomized controlled trialDescriptive statisticsClinical trialFamily medicineStatisticsPsychologyPsychiatryInternal medicine

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)0.490
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.805
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Reporting · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.510
Threshold uncertainty score0.629

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.4900.805
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0070.008
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0310.069
Bibliometrics0.0140.011
Science and technology studies0.0020.008
Scholarly communication0.0140.011
Open science0.0090.010
Research integrity0.0080.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.953
GPT teacher head0.713
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 designObservational
DomainReporting
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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueThe American Journal of Emergency MedicineSame topicMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsFrench-language works237,207