MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4235092944 · doi:10.1186/s12884-016-1036-3

Erratum to: CONCEPTT: Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Women with Type 1 Diabetes in Pregnancy Trial: A multi-center, multi-national, randomized controlled trial - Study protocol

2016· erratum· en· W4235092944 on OpenAlexaffabout
Denice S. Feig, Elizabeth Asztalos, Rosa Corcoy, Alberto de Leiva, Lois Donovan, Moshe Hod, Lois Jovanovič, Craig Kollman, Ruth McManus, Kellie E. Murphy, Katrina J. Ruedy, Johanna Sanchez, George Tomlinson, Helen Murphy

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Pregnancy and Childbirth · 2016
Typeerratum
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Research
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of CalgarySunnybrook HospitalMount Sinai HospitalHealth Sciences CentreLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteToronto General HospitalUniversity Health NetworkSt Joseph's Health CareUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineReproductive medicineProtocol (science)Randomized controlled trialPregnancyCenter (category theory)ObstetricsType 2 diabetesContinuous glucose monitoringGynecologyDiabetes mellitusType 1 diabetesAlternative medicineInternal medicineEndocrinologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

After publication of the original article [1], it came to the authors' attention that an incorrect affiliation was inadvertently added in the Acknowledgements section for the CONCEPTT Collaborative Group. The authors would like to amend the following statement in the CONCEPTT Collaborative Group section as follows: The correct affiliation for Julia Lowe and Anna Rogowsky should read Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto.

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)0.036
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.212
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 score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.191

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0360.212
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0080.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0570.014

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.303 · 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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Pregnancy and ChildbirthSame topicDiabetes Management and ResearchFrench-language works237,207