MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285195471 · doi:10.1177/20543581221080327

Can Peer Review Be Kinder? Supportive Peer Review: A Re-Commitment to Kindness and a Call to Action

2022· editorial· en· W4285195471 on OpenAlexaffabout
Catherine M. Clase, Elizabeth Dicks, Rachel M. Holden, Manish M. Sood, Adeera Levin, Kamyar Kalantar‐Zadeh, Linda W. Moore, Susan J. Bartlett, Aminu K. Bello, Clara Bohm, Darren Bridgewater, Josée Bouchard, Dylan Burger, Juan Jesús Carrero, Maoliosa Donald, Meghan J. Elliott, Maya J. Goldenberg, Meg Jardine, Ngan N. Lam, W. Joy Maddigan, François Madore, Thomas A. Mavrakanas, Amber O. Molnar, G. V. Ramesh Prasad, Claudio Rigatto, Karthik Tennankore, Elena Torban, Laurel J. Trainor, Christine A. White, Sunny Hartwig

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Kidney Health and Disease · 2022
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMeta-analysis and systematic reviews
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityUniversity of TorontoMemorial University of NewfoundlandUniversity of GuelphUniversité de MontréalUniversity of CalgaryOrthopaedic Innovation CentreUniversity of AlbertaSt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonUniversity of ManitobaOttawa HospitalUniversity of British ColumbiaKidney Foundation of CanadaQueen's UniversityMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Prince Edward IslandUniversity of OttawaMcGill UniversityNova Scotia Health AuthorityImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKindnessMedicineHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Peer review aims to select articles for publication and to improve articles before publication. We believe that this process can be infused by kindness without losing rigor. In 2014, the founding editorial team of the Canadian Journal of Kidney Health and Disease (CJKHD) made an explicit commitment to treat authors as we would wish to be treated ourselves. This broader group of authors reaffirms this principle, for which we suggest the terminology “supportive review.”

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)0.212
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.579
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Evaluation · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.788
Threshold uncertainty score0.972

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2120.579
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.004
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0070.018
Scholarly communication0.0250.023
Open science0.0080.006
Research integrity0.0290.059
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.009

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 head0.459
GPT teacher head0.517
Teacher spread0.058 · 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
DomainEvaluation
GenreEditorial

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

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Kidney Health and DiseaseSame topicMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsFrench-language works237,207