MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3036351727

Estudio bibliométrico de los trabajos especiales de grado sobre cirugía presentados de la Facultad de Odontología de La Universidad de Los Andes, 2005-2017

2019· article· es· W3036351727 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Katiany García, Damián Cloquell

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth and Medical Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpecialtyOral and maxillofacial surgeryPresentation (obstetrics)Oral surgeryDescriptive statisticsMedicineHumanitiesPsychologyDentistrySurgeryFamily medicineArtMathematicsStatistics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Oral and Maxillofacial surgery is that specialty of dentistry that deals with the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of diseases, trauma and functional or aesthetic defects, congenital or acquired hard and soft tissues of the oral and maxillofacial region. For this reason, it represents an area of importance, especially when students conduct research as a requirement for the presentation of the special degree work, which can be analyzed by bibliometric markers. The objective of this study was to analyze the behavior of bibliometric indicators in the special degree work at the Faculty of Dentistry, Universidad de Los Andes (FOULA) between the years 2005- 2017 in the area of Surgery. It was analytical research of documental design, where the production indicators were described by years and tutor’s area, as well as the thematic and methodological content indicators. An analysis of the methodological structure was also carried out. The sample was made up of 53 theses on surgery. They were carried out in ten different subjects. It was found: Vancouver as a reference style, the quantitative approach, the type of descriptive research, longitudinal and experimental designs, observation as a data collection technique and descriptive statistics. There were 87% errors in taxonomic classification including misuse of methodological authors. It is concluded that it is important to establish a better interaction among professors of the Department of Research and the subject of Surgery at the FOULA since an excess of methodological errors was observed.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmaBibliometrics
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptBibliometrics
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.003
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.465
Teacher spread0.421 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHealth and Medical EducationCategoryBibliometricsFrench-language works237,207