MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206014235 · doi:10.1503/cmaj.80405

Implementing machine learning in paramedicine

2022· letter· en· W4206014235 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Ryan P. Strum, Andrew P. Costa

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Medical Association Journal · 2022
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealthcare Technology and Patient Monitoring
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUSableComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceMachine learningHuman–computer interactionData scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We laud the authors of a recent CMAJ article for their usable framework for the development and adoption of machine-learned solutions[1][1] and propose that this will be useful to guide the use of machine learning in paramedicine. Paramedic clinical decision-making is well positioned to benefit 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 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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.070
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.070
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.006
Scholarly communication0.0060.009
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0200.034
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.006

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.280 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Medical Association JournalSame topicHealthcare Technology and Patient MonitoringFrench-language works237,207