MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4282833430 · doi:10.1016/s2213-2600(22)00044-3

Use of pragmatic and explanatory trial designs in acute care research: lessons from COVID-19

2022· review· en· W4282833430 on OpenAlexaff
Jonathan D. Casey, Laura M. Beskow, Jeremy Brown, Samuel M. Brown, Étienne Gayat, Michelle N. Gong, Michael O. Harhay, Samir Jaber, Jacob C. Jentzer, Pierre‐François Laterre, John C. Marshall, Michael A. Matthay, Todd W. Rice, Yves Rosenberg, Alison E. Turnbull, Lorraine B. Ware, Wesley H. Self, Alexandre Mebazaa, Sean P. Collins

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet Respiratory Medicine · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesAbbott DiagnosticsCenters for Disease Control and PreventionPatient-Centered Outcomes Research InstituteBaxter InternationalNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteAgency for Healthcare Research and QualityU.S. Department of DefenseGilead SciencesBill and Melinda Gates FoundationNational Institutes of HealthU.S. Department of Health and Human Services
KeywordsMedicineClinical trialIntensive care medicineHydroxychloroquinePsychological interventionAlternative medicineClinical study designCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)MEDLINEResearch designMedical physicsNursingInternal medicinePathologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.455
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.550
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.545
Threshold uncertainty score0.672

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.4550.550
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0140.010
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.006
Scholarly communication0.0080.007
Open science0.0050.004
Research integrity0.0090.016
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.937
GPT teacher head0.624
Teacher spread0.313 · 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
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

Citations49
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueThe Lancet Respiratory MedicineSame topicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207