MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4213345299 · doi:10.7326/acpjc-2001-134-2-a11

Of studies, syntheses, synopses, and systems: the “4S” evolution of services for finding current best evidence

2001· article· en· W4213345299 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueACP Journal Club · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicService-Oriented Architecture and Web Services
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCurrent (fluid)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

EditorialMarch 1, 2001Of studies, syntheses, synopses, and systems: the "4S" evolution of services for finding current best evidenceR. Brian Haynes, MD, PhDR. Brian Haynes, MD, PhDMcMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada (R.B.H.)Author, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/ACPJC-2001-134-2-A11 SectionsAboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack Citations ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail Practical resources to support evidence-based health care decisions are rapidly evolving. New and better services are being created through the combined forces of increasing numbers of clinically important studies, increasingly robust evidence synthesis and synopsis services, and better information technology and systems. The need for these resources is spurred by demands for higher quality at lower cost from health services, but the impact of better information resources is being blunted by noisy pretenders promising "the earth" but yielding just the dirt. Providers and consumers of evidence-based health care can help themselves to best current evidence by recognizing and using the ...References1 Haynes RB, Sackett DL, Gray JR, Cook DL, Guyatt GH. Transferring evidence from research into practice: 1. The role of clinical care research evidence in clinical decisions [Editorial]. ACP J Club. 1996 Nov-Dec;125:A14-6. Google Scholar2 Hunt DL, Haynes RB, Hanna SE, Smith K. Effects of computer-based clinical decision support systems on physician performance and patient outcomes: a systematic review. JAMA. 1998;280:1339-46. Google Scholar Author, Article, and Disclosure InformationAffiliations: McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada (R.B.H.) PreviousarticleNextarticle Advertisement FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Cited byWelcome, PIER, A New Physicians' Information and Education ResourceRobert G. Badgett, MD and Cynthia D. Mulrow, MD, MSc March 1, 2001Volume 134, Issue 2Page: A11KeywordsAntibioticsCommon coldComputersComputing systemsDatabasesElectronic medical recordsEvidence based medicineFallsHealth careHealth care providersInformation technologyInternetLibrariesMedical servicesPenicillinRespiratory systemSafetySystematic reviewsTetracyclinesUpper respiratory tract infections ePublished: 9 March 2020 Issue Published: March 1, 2001 Copyright & PermissionsCopyright © 2001 by American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.PDF downloadLoading ...

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.452
Threshold uncertainty score0.401

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.262 · 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