MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3137877232 · doi:10.1093/bjs/znab072

This month on Twitter

2021· article· en· W3137877232 on OpenAlexaff
Giovanni Marchegiani

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish journal of surgery · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Healthcare and Medical Tourism
Canadian institutionsPancreas Centre (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSocial mediaWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

By Giovanni Marchegiani, BJS Editor Assistant In January, @bjsurgery generated 244 400 impressions, 201 retweets and 407 likes, and gained 440 new followers. The tweet with the highest number of engagements from the BJS account, with over 15 087 impressions, was from the BJS Cutting Edge blog about ‘Angst among surgeons during the COVID-19 crisis’, on behalf of S-COVID Collaborative Group. The second tweet with most engagement (14 400 impressions) was about a recently published original article, the PREDICT Study by Stephensen et al., assessing the role of C‐reactive protein trajectory to predict colorectal anastomotic leak.1 The top tweet mentioning BJS was from @JlRodicio, about the virtual congress of the SEIQ (Sociedad Espanola de Investigaciones Quirurgicas) which will be held on the 11th-12th March (abstracts from the congress will be published in BJS). During the month of January, the BJS twitter account also ranked the five papers with the top Altmetric scores published on the last 6 months.2–6 The five tweets generated a total of 40 000 impressions. Of note, three out of five top-ranking articles were COVID-related2,4,6, including the one with the highest Altmetric score of 256, by the COVIDSurg Collaborative, on delaying surgery for patients with a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection2. The visual abstract posted about the 5-year outcomes of merged data from two randomized clinical trials on laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass versus laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SLEEVEPASS and SM-BOSS)7 reached a total of 24 847 impressions and 862 engagements, being the fifth top tweet from @bjsurgery this month. Donohue and Mohan’s paper on pregnancy, parenthood and second-generation bias8 in surgery was extremely popular, with @MarinaYLeft saying ‘As a mum and a surgeon [it] is great to see this article in @BJSurgery. It's not one or the other anymore’. The BJS workshop at ASIT on how to write a conference abstract moved online this year, and despite this change, it remained very popular, with over 175 people dialled in to the webinar.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.831
Threshold uncertainty score0.241

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.8310.797

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 head0.135
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueBritish journal of surgerySame topicGlobal Healthcare and Medical TourismFrench-language works237,207