MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3038397370 · doi:10.1055/a-1174-0086

Covid-19: Eine Ad hoc Public-Health-Ethikberatung

2020· article· de· W3038397370 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueDas Gesundheitswesen · 2020
Typearticle
Languagede
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEthics in medical practice
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Public healthPolitical science2019-20 coronavirus outbreakVirologyMedicineNursingDiseaseOutbreakInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Zusammenfassung In diesem Dokument beschreiben wir den Prozess und den Inhalt einer ad hoc Public-Health-Ethikberatung vom 22. März 2020 für eine regionale Gesundheitsbehörde (Bayerisches Landesamt für Gesundheit und Lebensmittelsicherheit) zu Entscheidungen im Zusammenhang mit Covid-19.

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.

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)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.282
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.255
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.282
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.028
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.029

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 head0.307
GPT teacher head0.541
Teacher spread0.234 · 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