MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3159938692 · doi:10.5771/9783748924869-27

Time to Rethink the Default Settings in Neuroscience: Hormonal Transition Periods as Natural Experiments and Why Sex Matters.

2021· book-chapter· en· W3159938692 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Rachel G. Zsido, Julia Sacher

Bibliographic record

VenueNomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG eBooks · 2021
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicScience Education and Perceptions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMax-Planck-Institut für Kognitions- und NeurowissenschaftenMedizinische Universität WienUniversität WienUniversity of TorontoNational Alliance for Research on Schizophrenia and Depression
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)Diversity (politics)PublishingSTELLA (programming language)Transition (genetics)SociologyPsychoanalysisArt historyLibrary sciencePsychologyHistoryArtLiteratureComputer scienceAnthropologyBiologyVisual arts

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Diversity drives scientific discovery. Yet, many basic and clinical neuroscience studies fail to include equal numbers of females in their samples, and even fewer present sex-specific analysis of their data. We propose the following strategies to overcome this bias: (1) increase numbers of female study participants, (2) consider sex as a primary variable, and (3) when justified, study all-female samples to provide a more indepth understanding of female-specific experiences such as the menstrual cycle as well as sex-specific risk trajectories and pathologies. In our research program, we study the influence of sex and sex hormones on brain states in health and disease. We strive to explain the mechanisms underlying the unique vulnerability of women to depression and dementia. Our ultimate goal is to improve brain health for both sexes. By applying scientific expertise in neuropharmacology, quantitative neurochemical imaging and sex differences to traditional research questions in the cognitive sciences, we provide novel perspectives on the diversity of human cognition and brain plasticity. Knowledge gaps and missing data are often the primary driving force behind the development of scientific breakthroughs. The curiosity and ur-

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.994
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.014
Scholarly communication0.0050.016
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.005

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
DomainMethods
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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG eBooksSame topicScience Education and PerceptionsFrench-language works237,207