MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3126675076 · doi:10.1186/s40779-021-00298-4

Development of rapid advice guideline and standard and continuous updating guideline: experiences and practice

2021· article· en· W3126675076 on OpenAlexaff
Ying-Hui Jin, Xiao-Mei Yao, Xian‐Tao Zeng

Bibliographic record

VenueMilitary Medical Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClinical practice guidelines implementation
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGuidelineAdvice (programming)PandemicCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)MedicineMedical educationFamily medicinePsychologyComputer scienceDiseaseInfectious disease (medical specialty)Pathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We published rapid advice guidelines and updated guidelines for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) management on February 6, 2020, and September 4, 2020, respectively. These two guidelines vary widely in their developmental background, type of evidence, grade of recommendation and so on. We shared our experience for the development of these two guidelines to help clinical practitioners better understand and implement guidelines and to help guideline developers facilitate communication and discussion for guideline development during the pandemic.

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)0.172
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.421
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.828
Threshold uncertainty score0.907

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1720.421
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.011
Open science0.0030.007
Research integrity0.0100.014
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.005

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 head0.213
GPT teacher head0.554
Teacher spread0.341 · 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 designQualitative
DomainMethods
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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMilitary Medical ResearchSame topicClinical practice guidelines implementationFrench-language works237,207