MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3107096645 · doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2020.08.026

Applying a Bookmarking Approach to Setting Clinically Relevant Interpretive Standards for the Spinal Cord Injury–Functional Index/Capacity Basic Mobility and Self-Care Item Bank Scores

2020· article· en· W3107096645 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Pamela A. Kisala, David Victorson, Ratna Nandakumar, Andrew Shermeyer, Denise Fyffe, Allen W. Heinemann, Trevor A. Dyson‐Hudson, David S. Tulsky

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Cord Injury Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation ResearchRick Hansen Institute
KeywordsSpinal cord injuryRehabilitationPhysical therapyConvergence (economics)MedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychologyPsychiatrySpinal cord

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)0.226
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.545
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.226
Threshold uncertainty score0.954

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2260.545
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0120.007
Science and technology studies0.0060.005
Scholarly communication0.0090.007
Open science0.0050.005
Research integrity0.0040.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.004

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.339 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations7
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueArchives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation→Same topicSpinal Cord Injury Research→French-language works237,207→