Estimating ecotoxicological effects of chemicals on tropical reef-building corals; a systematic review protocol
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Tropical coral reefs cover only ca. 0.1% of the Earth’s surface but host an outstanding biodiversity and provide important ecosystem services to millions of people living nearby. They are currently threatened by global (e.g., climate change) and local (e.g., chemical pollution) stressors that interact in different ways. While global stressors cannot be mitigated by local actions alone, local stressors can be reduced through ecosystem management. A systematic map on the impacts of chemicals arising from anthropogenic activities on tropical reef-building corals, which are the main engineer species of reef ecosystems, was published in 2021. This systematic map gathered an abundant literature (908 articles corresponding to 7937 studies), and identified four well-represented subtopics, amenable to relevant full syntheses. Here, we focused on one of the four subtopics: we aimed to systematically review the evidence on the ecotoxicological effects of chemicals on tropical reef-building corals. Methods The evidence will be identified from the recent systematic map on the impacts of chemicals arising from anthropogenic activities on tropical reef-building corals. Especially, all studies in the map database corresponding to the knowledge cluster “evidence on the ecotoxicological effects of chemicals on corals” will be selected. To identify the evidence produced since then, a search update will be performed using a subset of the search string used for the systematic map, and titles, abstracts and full-texts will be screened according to the criteria defining the selected cluster of the map. In addition, as the eligibility criteria for the systematic review are narrower than those used to define the cluster in the systematic map, additional screening will be carried out. The included studies will then be critically appraised and a low, medium, or high risk of bias will be assigned to each study. Data will be extracted from studies and synthesised according to a strategy depending on the type of exposure and outcome. Synthesis will be mainly quantitative but also narrative, aiming to identify toxicity thresholds of chemicals for corals.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it