MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3184362473

Citation analysis for monitoring evidence-based research – a systematic review of meta-research studies

2021· review· en· W3184362473 on OpenAlexaff
Birgitte Nørgaard, Matthias Briel, Stavri Chrysostomou, Danijela Ristić-Medić, Sandra C. Buttiġieġ, Ele Kiisk, Livia Puljak, Małgorzata M Bała, Tina Poklepović Peričić, Wiktoria Leśniak, Hans Lund, Dawid Pieper

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Southern Denmark Research Portal (University of Southern Denmark) · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicImpact of AI and Big Data on Business and Society
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityCommunity Based Research Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCitationSystematic reviewMeta-analysisCitation analysisData scienceComputer scienceLibrary scienceMEDLINEPolitical scienceMedicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmaMetaresearchBibliometrics
Domain: Evaluation · Genre: Review
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Systematic reviewlow
gptBibliometrics
Domain: not available · Genre: Review
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Systematic reviewhigh
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.077
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Open science, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.526
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0770.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.006
Bibliometrics0.0060.018
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0050.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.761
GPT teacher head0.523
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

MetaresearchBibliometrics

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designSystematic review
DomainEvaluation
GenreReview

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 routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Southern Denmark Research Portal (University of Southern Denmark)Same topicImpact of AI and Big Data on Business and SocietyCategoryMetaresearchFrench-language works237,207