MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3160793976 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-456553/v1

Health Status Transitions Related to Traumatic Brain Injury.

2021· preprint· en· W3160793976 on OpenAlexafffund
Michael Escobar, Tatyana Mollayeva, Andrew Tran, Vincy Chan, Angela Colantonio, Mitchell Sutton

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity Health NetworkToronto Rehabilitation InstitutePublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institutes of HealthCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchGovernment of Ontario
KeywordsTraumatic brain injuryEvent (particle physics)PopulationOccupational safety and healthMedicinePsychologyMedical emergencyPsychiatryEnvironmental healthPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract For centuries, the study of traumatic brain injury (TBI) has been centred on historical observation and analyses of personal, social, and environmental processes, which have been examined separately. Today, however, computation implementation and vast patient data repositories are producing datasets of such volume and complexity as to challenge traditional scientific methodology. Drastically different approaches show great promise for research on TBI. We report a computational analysis of health status over time using population-wide health administrative data of patients with TBI. Our approach facilitates health status at injury event evaluation and classification, and unfolds health status trajectories, from that of preceding injury to the injury event itself, as they concern external causes of injury and injury severity. Taken together, the contrasting and interwoven aspects of health status on a time continuum can influence injury event trajectories and should be considered in TBI risk analysis for the improvement of diagnosis, treatment, and prevention.

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)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.179
GPT teacher head0.506
Teacher spread0.326 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Square→Same topicTraumatic Brain Injury Research→French-language works237,207→