MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4240475504 · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511545795.001

Preface

2000· book-chapter· es· W4240475504 on OpenAlexaff
Janet E. Henderson, David Goltzman

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2000
Typebook-chapter
Languagees
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and osteoporosis research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Osteoporosis is one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality amongst the elderly. With the prediction that the number of people who are 60 years or more will increase from ∼300 million to greater than 700 million in the next 25 years, it can be appreciated that osteoporosis will rapidly reach epidemic proportions. This will not only represent a huge health care cost but also compromise the physical well-being and quality of life of a substantial segment of the world's population. Osteoporosis has been defined as ‘… a systemic skeletal disease characterized by low bone mass and microarchitectural deterioration of bone tissue, with a consequent increase in bone fragility and susceptibility to fracture.’ By World Health Organization standards, the term osteoporosis is used to designate bone mass values of 2.5 standard deviations below the young adult mean. Using this criterion, based on bone mass alone, 18 million North Americans have established osteoporosis and 10 million have osteopenia, which is a major risk factor for osteoporosis. As a consequence of these alarming predictions there has been a steady increase in the attention focused on the physiology and pathophysiology of bone. Many excellent texts are now available, which deal in depth with topics related to the clinical presentation and management of osteoporosis.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.556
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.5560.401

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 head0.262
Teacher spread0.227 · 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
GenreEditorial

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
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooks→Same topicBone health and osteoporosis research→French-language works237,207→