Bibliographic record
Abstract
a comprehensive list of the top fifteen medical breakthroughs since the journal's inception in 1840.Breakthroughs ranged from antibiotics, birth control, and vaccines to the theory of evidence-based medicine (EBM) which was developed, in large part, at McMaster during the 1980's and emerged with publications from McMaster University in 1991 and 1992. WHAT IS EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE?According to Dr. David Sackett, a member of the original team, EBM is "the conscientious, explicit and judicious use of current best evidence in making decisions about the care of the individual patient.It means integrating individual clinical expertise with the best available external clinical evidence from systematic research."(Schartd, 2004).EBM represents a paradigm shift in the practice of clinical medicine.The old paradigm relies on a sound understanding of disease mechanisms and pathophysiology, and building a foundation of knowledge through unsystematic clinical observations.This foundation of content and expertise guides clinical decision making (Guyatt et al., 1992).The new paradigm displaces the emphasis from
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.044 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.030 | 0.007 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".