MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3145220454 · doi:10.1080/15265161.2021.1891347

We Have “Gifted” Enough: Indigenous Genomic Data Sovereignty in Precision Medicine

2021· letter· en· W3145220454 on OpenAlexaff
Krystal S. Tsosie, Joseph Yracheta, Jessica Kolopenuk, Janis Geary

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Bioethics · 2021
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEthics in Clinical Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsIndigenousReciprocity (cultural anthropology)SovereigntyPrecision medicineDonationSociologyEpistemologyPsychologySocial psychologyEngineering ethicsEnvironmental ethicsPublic relationsLawPolitical scienceGeneticsBiologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In “Obligations of the ‘Gift’: Reciprocity and Responsibility in Precision Medicine,” Lee (2021) rightly points out that disparities in health care access also lead to disparities in precision medi...

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)0.043
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.138
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.819
Threshold uncertainty score0.229

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0430.138
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0250.033
Scholarly communication0.0160.017
Open science0.0050.016
Research integrity0.1810.165
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.004

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 head0.580
GPT teacher head0.558
Teacher spread0.022 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations80
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Journal of BioethicsSame topicEthics in Clinical ResearchFrench-language works237,207