MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283077640 · doi:10.1016/j.jss.2022.04.008

Review and Quality Assessment of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses on the Management of Pediatric Inguinal Hernias: A Descriptive Study

2022· review· en· W4283077640 on OpenAlexaff
Noora Alshahwani, Daniel Briatico, Wonjae Lee, Forough Farrokhyar

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Surgical Research · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHernia repair and management
Canadian institutionsImpactMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSystematic reviewMedicineMeta-analysisCINAHLMEDLINEProtocol (science)Inguinal herniaPsychological interventionSurgeryHerniaAlternative medicinePathologyNursing

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)0.059
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.195
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Evaluation · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score0.312

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0590.195
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0220.042
Bibliometrics0.0180.018
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.873
GPT teacher head0.646
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designMeta-analysis
DomainEvaluation
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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Surgical ResearchSame topicHernia repair and managementFrench-language works237,207