MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3214205714 · doi:10.1016/j.cmpb.2021.106479

Corrigendum to Longitudinal machine learning modeling of MS patient trajectories improves predictions of disability progression: [Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine, Volume 208, (September 2021) 106180]

2021· erratum· en· W3214205714 on OpenAlexaff
Edward De Brouwer, Thijs Becker, Yves Moreau, Eva Havrdová, María Trojano, Sara Eichau, Serkan Özakbaş, Marco Onofrj, Pierre Grammond, Jens Kühle, Ludwig Kappos, Patrizia Sola, Elisabetta Cartechini, Jeannette Lechner‐Scott, Raed Alroughani, Oliver Gerlach, Tomáš Kalinčík, Franco Granella, François Grand’Maison, Roberto Bergamaschi, María José Sá, Bart Van Wijmeersch, Aysun Soysal, José Luis Sánchez-Menoyo, Claudio Solaro, Cavit Boz, Gerardo Iuliano, Katherine Buzzard, Eduardo Agüera, Murat Terzi, Tamara Castillo‐Triviño, Daniele Spitaleri, Vincent Van Pesch, Vahid Shaygannejad, F T Moore, Celia Oreja‐Guevara, Davide Maimone, Riadh Gouider, Tünde Csépány, Cristina Ramo‐Tello, Liesbet M. Peeters

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine · 2021
Typeerratum
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsJewish General HospitalCentre intégré de santé et de services sociaux de Chaudière-Appalaches
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiomedicineVolume (thermodynamics)Computer scienceMachine learningArtificial intelligenceData scienceBioinformatics

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

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.049
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.117
Threshold uncertainty score0.393

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.049
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0090.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1170.067

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 head0.192
GPT teacher head0.493
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueComputer Methods and Programs in BiomedicineSame topicArtificial Intelligence in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207