MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4236622789 · doi:10.1097/ccm.0000000000000888

The authors reply

2015· letter· en· W4236622789 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sonny Dhanani, Laura Hornby, Sam D. Shemie

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care Medicine · 2015
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTrauma and Emergency Care Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreCanadian Blood ServicesMontreal Children's HospitalChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOrgan donationFamily medicineDonationOfficerHealth careUniversity hospitalLibrary scienceTransplantationPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pediatric Critical Care, Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario, Ottawa Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada, and Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada; and Canadian Blood Services, Ottawa, ON, Canada Pediatric Critical Care, Montreal Children’s Hospital, McGill University Health Centre, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada Design and implementation of the study and manuscript development were coordinated at the Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario. Supported, in part, by grants from the Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario Research Institute, Physician’s Services Incorporated, and Canadian Institute for Health Research. Dr. Dhanani consulted for Trillium Gift of Life Network (chief medical officer). Ms. Hornby served as a research consultant for Canadian Blood Services and received grant support as the project manager for CIHR-funded research in organ donation. Dr. Shemie is a medical advisor for deceased donation to Canadian Blood Services.

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)0.031
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0430.033
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.010

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.308 · 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
GenreCommentary

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
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Care Medicine→Same topicTrauma and Emergency Care Studies→French-language works237,207→