MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205856092 · doi:10.1038/s41433-021-01913-3

Correction to: Risk of bias: why measure it, and how?

2022· erratum· en· W4205856092 on OpenAlexaff
Mark Phillips, Peter K. Kaiser, Lehana Thabane, Mohit Bhandari, Varun Chaudhary, Charles C. Wykoff, Sobha Sivaprasad, David Sarraf, Sophie J. Bakri, Sunir J. Garg, Rishi P. Singh, Frank G. Holz, Tien Yin Wong

Bibliographic record

VenueEye · 2022
Typeerratum
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDelphi Technique in Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeasure (data warehouse)MEDLINEOptometryComputer scienceMedicineData scienceData miningPolitical scienceLaw

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
gemmaMetaresearch
Domain: Methods · Genre: Other
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablelow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Other
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablehigh
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.365
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score0.675

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.365
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0110.008
Science and technology studies0.0070.005
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0050.005
Research integrity0.0120.017
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2020.106

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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.408
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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

Metaresearch

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

Study designNot applicable
DomainMethods
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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueEyeSame topicDelphi Technique in ResearchCategoryMetaresearchFrench-language works237,207