MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3037685923 · doi:10.1016/j.tmrv.2020.06.001

A Scoping Review of Registered Clinical Trials of Cellular Therapy for COVID-19 and a Framework for Accelerated Synthesis of Trial Evidence—FAST Evidence

2020· review· en· W3037685923 on OpenAlexaff
Gary Liao, Katina Zheng, Manoj M. Lalu, Dean Fergusson, David Allan

Bibliographic record

VenueTransfusion Medicine Reviews · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBiomedical Ethics and Regulation
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineClinical trialMeta-analysisCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PoolingCell therapyMechanical ventilationIntensive care medicineInternal medicineCellBiologyComputer scienceDisease

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)0.121
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.245
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.121
Threshold uncertainty score0.639

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1210.245
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.014
Bibliometrics0.0140.012
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0100.007
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0080.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.812
GPT teacher head0.638
Teacher spread0.175 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations27
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueTransfusion Medicine ReviewsSame topicBiomedical Ethics and RegulationFrench-language works237,207