MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

BRIDGING RESEARCH AND CLINICAL PRACTICE: KEY STRATEGIES TO CREATING INNOVATIVE ADDICTION TREATMENT SERVICES

2014· article· en· W3016786483 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Kimberly Corace, Melanie Willows

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Addiction · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMental Health and Patient Involvement
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBridging (networking)Mental healthAddictionMedicineMedical educationPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

1The Royal Ottawa Mental Health Centre, Ottawa, Canada,2Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Canada,3Institute of Mental Health Research, Ottawa, Canada

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)0.382
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.381
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.382
Threshold uncertainty score0.762

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.3820.381
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0090.008
Science and technology studies0.0250.039
Scholarly communication0.0610.057
Open science0.0200.092
Research integrity0.0330.037
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0330.005

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 head0.296
GPT teacher head0.522
Teacher spread0.227 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of AddictionSame topicMental Health and Patient InvolvementFrench-language works237,207