MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3035349911

Rapid recommendations: Updates from 2019 guidelines: part 2.

2020· article· en· W3035349911 on OpenAlexaff
Danielle O’Toole

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClinical practice guidelines implementation
Canadian institutionsCollege of Family Physicians of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGuidelineContinuing medical educationComputer scienceData scienceMedicineContinuing educationMedical educationPathology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Continuing medical education is essential to improving the care that clinicians provide to patients. However, it can be overwhelming to read the increasing volume of medical literature. This article is the second part of a 2-part series[1][1] and summarizes guideline updates from 2019 that have the

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.088
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.145

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.088
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0070.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0430.043

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 head0.470
GPT teacher head0.451
Teacher spread0.018 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicClinical practice guidelines implementationFrench-language works237,207