MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3080518596 · doi:10.1002/trc2.12036

CCCDTD5: research diagnostic criteria for Alzheimer's Disease

2020· article· en· W3080518596 on OpenAlexaff
Serge Gauthier, Howard Chertkow, Joseph Theriault, Céline Chayer, Marie‐Chantal Ménard, Guy Lacombe, Pedro Rosa‐Neto, Zahinoor Ismail

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia Translational Research & Clinical Interventions · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-MontréalCégep Saint-Jean-sur-RichelieuUniversité de SherbrookeUniversité de MontréalOntario Brain InstituteBaycrest HospitalUniversity of CalgaryMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiseaseAlzheimer's diseaseClinical researchMedicinePsychologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The CCCDTD5 reviewed the research diagnostic criteria for Alzheimer's disease proposed in the NIA-AA Research Framework and supports their use in research but not in clinical practice.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0070.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.005

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 head0.592
GPT teacher head0.599
Teacher spread0.006 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia Translational Research & Clinical InterventionsSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207