MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4252831328 · doi:10.1503/cmaj.1041478

La Cochrane Collaboration a 10 ans : realisations et defis

2004· article· fr· W4252831328 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Medical Association Journal · 2004
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldMedicine
TopicClinical practice guidelines implementation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceInformation retrievalMedicineLibrary scienceGynecology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La logique de la Cochrane Collaboration demeure inattaquable. Aucune personne ni aucun groupe ne peuvent à eux seuls suivre les milliers d'études randomisées paraissent dans les publications médicales chaque année. L'origine de la Collaboration remonte à la fin des années 1980, lorsque Iain

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)0.457
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.822
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score0.670

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.4570.822
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.010
Bibliometrics0.0130.015
Science and technology studies0.0030.008
Scholarly communication0.0140.014
Open science0.0050.007
Research integrity0.0140.014
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.003

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.376 · 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
DomainMethods
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
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Medical Association JournalSame topicClinical practice guidelines implementationFrench-language works237,207