MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3138878998 · doi:10.2196/14654

Correction: SNOMED CT Concept Hierarchies for Computable Clinical Phenotypes From Electronic Health Record Data: Comparison of Intensional Versus Extensional Value Sets

2019· erratum· en· W3138878998 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ling Chu, Vaishnavi Kannan, Mujeeb Basit, Diane J Schaeflein, Adolfo R Ortuzar, Jimmie F Glorioso, Joel R Buchanan, DuWayne L. Willett

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Medical Informatics · 2019
Typeerratum
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSNOMED CTElectronic health recordExtensional definitionComputer scienceValue (mathematics)Health recordsData miningInformation retrievalMedicineTerminologyHealth careMachine learningLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

peer review.Accordingly, a number of changes have been made to restore content of the correct version of the manuscript.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.171
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.204

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.171
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.005
Science and technology studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0050.003
Research integrity0.0090.014
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0610.025

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.352 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Medical InformaticsSame topicMachine Learning in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207