MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

FC10 ICD and clinical practice

2001· article· en· W4243673561 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
S. K. K. Seah, Nlsam David Wllber, Christopher Plummet, Janet M. McComb

Bibliographic record

VenueEP Europace · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMedical Coding and Health Information
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineClinical PracticeIntensive care medicineMedical physicsFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In early 2000. we conducted a survey to learn about the Implementation of MADIT and MUSTT (M&M) prophylacUc ICD IndlcaUons In clinical practice during 1999. Results: 134 centers responded [11 BenelLLx. 7 France. 21 Germany. 7 Spain + Portugal. 10 Italy. 11 Scandinavia, 6 UK. 10 other European. 46 U.S.. 5 Canada). M&M Indications represented I 1% of all Initial Implants for the year 1999 In Europe and 24% In US. Within Europe. large geographical variations (from 6% In Benelux to 15% In Italy) can be observed (see graph).

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.595
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.003

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 head0.388
GPT teacher head0.591
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEP EuropaceSame topicMedical Coding and Health InformationFrench-language works237,207