MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4229974210 · doi:10.14740/jocmr3710-c

Correction to: The Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Analogue Therapy May Not Impact Final Height in Precocious Puberty of Girls With Onset of Puberty Aged 6 - 8 Years

2019· erratum· en· W4229974210 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Özlem Korkmaz, Gulsenem Sari, İlkin Mecidov, Samim Özen, Damla Gökşen, Şükran Darcan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Medicine Research · 2019
Typeerratum
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Disease and Adiposity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCentral precocious pubertyPrecocious pubertyGonadotropin-releasing hormoneEndocrinologyPediatricsGonadotropinInternal medicineHormoneLuteinizing hormone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors would like to make the corrections as follows.In abstract section, paragraph 3, change "Fourteen cases received monthly 3.75 mg depot triptorelin acetate and 11 received three-monthly 11.25 mg depot" to "Fourteen cases received monthly 3.75 mg depot triptorelin acetate and 11 received three-monthly 11.25 mg depot leuprolide acetate."In materials and methods section, paragraph 2, change "Fourteen of the treated cases received monthly 3.75 mg depot triptorelin acetate 75 -100 µg/kg, while 11 received three monthly 11.25 mg depot triptorelin acetate" to 'Fourteen of the treated cases received monthly 3.75 mg depot triptorelin acetate 75 -100 µg/kg, while 11 received three monthly 11.25 mg depot leuprolide acetate."In results section, paragraph 1, change "Patients of the treatment group received two different treatment regimens

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.058
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.109

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.058
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0060.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0330.020

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 head0.153
GPT teacher head0.476
Teacher spread0.323 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Medicine ResearchSame topicCardiovascular Disease and AdiposityFrench-language works237,207