MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4247903468 · doi:10.1016/j.ijsu.2011.10.001

CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials

2011· article· en· W4247903468 on OpenAlexafffund
David Moher, Sally Hopewell, Kenneth F. Schulz, Víctor M. Montori, Peter C Gøtzsche, P.J. Devereaux, Diana Elbourne, Matthias Egger, Douglas G. Altman

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Surgery · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMeta-analysis and systematic reviews
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University Medical CentreHealth Sciences CentreOttawa Hospital
FundersMedical Research CouncilUniversity of California, IrvineInstitut National de la Santé et de la Recherche MédicaleUniversity of OxfordOttawa Hospital Research InstituteMcMaster UniversityJohns Hopkins UniversityCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public HealthUniversity of Pennsylvania
KeywordsConsolidated Standards of Reporting TrialsChecklistMedicineCritical appraisalRandomized controlled trialSystematic reviewStatement (logic)Psychological interventionMEDLINEAlternative medicineFamily medicinePsychologyNursingSurgeryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OpenAlex records an abstract for this work, but it could not be fetched just now.

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)0.273
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.608
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Reporting · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.727
Threshold uncertainty score0.896

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2730.608
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0070.008
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.018
Bibliometrics0.0240.024
Science and technology studies0.0030.006
Scholarly communication0.0110.010
Open science0.0120.010
Research integrity0.0130.024
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0640.043

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 head0.942
GPT teacher head0.597
Teacher spread0.345 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
DomainReporting
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

Citations2,391
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Surgery→Same topicMeta-analysis and systematic reviews→French-language works237,207→