MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3103755500 · doi:10.1057/s41599-020-00643-3

Sex and gender considerations in health research: a trainee and allied research personnel perspective

2020· article· en· W3103755500 on OpenAlexafffund
Cindy Z. Kalenga, Jeanna Parsons Leigh, Janessa Griffith, Daniele C. Wolf, Sandra M. Dumanski, Arlene Desjarlais, Lisa Petermann, Sofia B. Ahmed

Bibliographic record

VenueHumanities and Social Sciences Communications · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSex and Gender in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalWomen's College HospitalAlberta Kidney Disease NetworkUniversity of TorontoDalhousie UniversityLibin Cardiovascular Institute of Alberta
FundersInstitute of Gender and HealthCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsAgency (philosophy)Medical educationCurriculumTransparency (behavior)Perspective (graphical)Focus groupQualitative researchPsychologyFunding AgencyAccountabilityPublic relationsPolitical scienceMedicinePedagogySociologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OpenAlex records an abstract for this work, but it could not be fetched just now.

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
gemmaMetaresearch
Domain: Methods · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablelow
gptMetaresearch
Domain: Methods · Genre: Commentary
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Theoretical or conceptuallow
models splitAgreement 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.563
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.902
GPT teacher head0.571
Teacher spread0.332 · 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.

Metaresearch

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designNot applicable · Theoretical or conceptual
DomainMethods
GenreEmpirical · Commentary

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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHumanities and Social Sciences CommunicationsSame topicSex and Gender in HealthcareCategoryMetaresearchFrench-language works237,207