MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4237930987 · doi:10.1503/cmaj.112-2080

Recommendations on screening for type 2 diabetes in adults

2012· article· en· W4237930987 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Doris Barwich, François Primeau

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Medical Association Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicObesity and Health Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalCégep de Lévis
Fundersnot available
KeywordsType 2 diabetesComputer scienceMedicineDiabetes mellitusData scienceBioinformaticsEndocrinologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The recommendations from the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care published in the Oct. 16, 2012 issue of CMAJ have been updated.[1][1] The revised recommendations are included in the polywrap of this issue and can be found online at [www.cmaj.ca][2]. 1. [↵][3]Canadian Task Force on

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.388
Threshold uncertainty score0.772

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0060.001
Research integrity0.0050.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.010

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.352 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Medical Association JournalSame topicObesity and Health PracticesFrench-language works237,207