MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4253258974 · doi:10.1186/s12998-021-00368-3

Correction to: The global summit on the efficacy and effectiveness of spinal manipulative therapy for the prevention and treatment of non-musculoskeletal disorders: a systematic review of the literature

2021· review· en· W4253258974 on OpenAlexaff
Pierre Côté, Jan Hartvigsen, Iben Axén, Charlotte Leboeuf‐Yde, Melissa Corso, Heather M. Shearer, Jessica J. Wong, Andrée-Anne Marchand, J. David Cassidy, Simon French, Gregory N. Kawchuk, Silvano Mior, Erik Poulsen, John Srbely, Carlo Ammendolia, Marc‐André Blanchette, Jason W. Busse, André Bussières, Carol Cancelliere, Henrik Wulff Christensen, Diana De Carvalho, Katie de Luca, Alister du Rose, Andreas Eklund, Roger Engel, Guillaume Goncalves, Jeffrey J. Hébert, Cesar A. Hincapié, Maria Hondras, Amanda Kimpton, Henrik Hein Lauridsen, Stanley Innes, Anne-Laure Meyer, David Newell, Søren O’Neill, Isabelle Pagé, Steven Passmore, Stephen M. Perle, Jeffrey Quon, Mana Rezai, Maja Stupar, Michael Swain, Andrew Vitiello, Kenneth A. Weber, Kenneth J. Young, Hainan Yu

Bibliographic record

VenueChiropractic & Manual Therapies · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMyofascial pain diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of New BrunswickMemorial University of NewfoundlandMcGill UniversityMcMaster UniversityMount Sinai HospitalUniversity of AlbertaOntario Tech UniversityUniversity of GuelphPublic Health OntarioCentre for Disability Prevention and RehabilitationImpactCanadian Memorial Chiropractic CollegeUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSummitMedicineAlternative medicineManual therapyPhysical therapyRehabilitationSpinal manipulationPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedical physicsFamily medicineLow back painPathologyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via the original article.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.644
Threshold uncertainty score0.483

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.341 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChiropractic & Manual TherapiesSame topicMyofascial pain diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207