MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4206610800 · doi:10.1016/j.jval.2021.11.1131

POSB364 Systematic Literature Reviews (SLRS) of Economic Evaluations and Health Utility Studies of AML Treatments for Adults Receiving High Intensity Induction Therapy, with or without Maintenance Therapy

2022· article· en· W4206610800 on OpenAlexaff
Mervat Habib Ahmed, Beatrice Suero, Heather Cameron, C Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueValue in Health · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myeloid Leukemia Research
Canadian institutionsEVERSANA (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSystematic reviewGemtuzumab ozogamicinMEDLINEQuality-adjusted life yearInduction chemotherapyEconomic evaluationCochrane LibraryCost effectivenessIntensive care medicineInternal medicineMeta-analysisChemotherapyPathology

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)0.035
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.160
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score0.183

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0350.160
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.029
Bibliometrics0.0140.014
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.179
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.257 · 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.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueValue in Health→Same topicAcute Myeloid Leukemia Research→French-language works237,207→