MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3039416536 · doi:10.1016/j.drugpo.2020.102840

Ranking evidence in substance use and addiction

2020· article· en· W3039416536 on OpenAlexafffund
Hudson Reddon, Thomas Kerr, M‐J Milloy

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Drug Policy · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV, Drug Use, Sexual Risk
Canadian institutionsSt. Paul's HospitalUniversity of British ColumbiaHIV Legal NetworkBritish Columbia Centre on Substance Use
FundersNational Institute on Drug AbuseCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthCanadian HIV Trials Network, Canadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsObservational studyRandomized controlled trialEvidence-based medicineRanking (information retrieval)AddictionPopularityFlexibility (engineering)PsychologyCritical appraisalValue (mathematics)HarmMedicineAlternative medicinePsychiatryComputer scienceSocial psychologyArtificial intelligenceMachine learningSurgeryMathematicsStatistics

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)0.095
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.348
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Evaluation · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.905
Threshold uncertainty score0.500

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0950.348
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.005
Bibliometrics0.0460.024
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0120.007
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
DomainEvaluation
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

Citations16
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Drug PolicySame topicHIV, Drug Use, Sexual RiskFrench-language works237,207