MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3154949749 · doi:10.2196/28745

Peer Review of “Mass Testing With Contact Tracing Compared to Test and Trace for the Effective Suppression of COVID-19 in the United Kingdom: Systematic Review”

2021· article· en· W3154949749 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Milad Asgari Mehrabadi

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIRx Med · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCOVID-19 Digital Contact Tracing
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Contact tracingTRACE (psycholinguistics)Test (biology)Tracing2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Computer scienceMedicineGeologyVirologyInternal medicineProgramming languagePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This is a peer-review report submitted for the paper "Mass Testing With Contact Tracing Compared to Test and Trace for the Effective Suppression of COVID-19 in the United Kingdom: Systematic Review." Round 1 Review General CommentsThis review paper [1] assessed the importance of mass testing in controlling the spread of COVID-19 in the United Kingdom. Specific CommentsThis is a great, comprehensive work; congratulations to the author.

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)0.055
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.305
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Evaluation · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.945
Threshold uncertainty score0.292

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0550.305
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0170.019
Bibliometrics0.0120.008
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.007
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0060.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.274 · 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
DomainEvaluation
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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIRx MedSame topicCOVID-19 Digital Contact TracingFrench-language works237,207