MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220863033 · doi:10.1007/s11136-022-03117-y

Reducing research wastage by starting off on the right foot: optimally framing the research question

2022· article· en· W4220863033 on OpenAlexaff
Nancy E. Mayo, Nikki Ow, Miho Asano, Sorayya Askari, Ruth Barclay, Sabrina Figueiredo, Mélanie Hawkins, Stanley Hum, Mehmet Inceer, Navaldeep Kaur, Ayse Kuspinar, Kedar Mate, A Moga, Maryam Mozafarinia

Bibliographic record

VenueQuality of Life Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMeta-analysis and systematic reviews
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of TorontoMontreal Neurological Institute and HospitalDalhousie UniversityUniversity of British ColumbiaToronto Rehabilitation InstituteMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCLARITYFraming (construction)Psychological interventionPsychologyQualitative researchPopulationPromQuality of Life ResearchPublic healthApplied psychologyMedicineMedical educationSociologySocial scienceNursingHistoryEnvironmental health

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: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Theoretical or conceptuallow
gptMetaresearch
Domain: Methods · Genre: Commentary
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Theoretical or conceptualhigh
models agreeAgreement 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)0.512
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.762
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.488
Threshold uncertainty score0.602

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.5120.762
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0070.008
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0300.016
Bibliometrics0.0180.015
Science and technology studies0.0060.017
Scholarly communication0.0280.041
Open science0.0080.015
Research integrity0.0290.037
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.929
GPT teacher head0.675
Teacher spread0.254 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
DomainMethods
GenreEmpirical · Commentary

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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueQuality of Life ResearchSame topicMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsCategoryMetaresearchFrench-language works237,207