MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Biais de surveillance : quand les apparences sont trompeuses

2022· article· fr· W4285394973 on OpenAlexaff
Stefano Tancredi, Stéphane Cullati, Arnaud Chioléro

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue Médicale Suisse · 2022
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Systems and Practices
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePublic health surveillanceHealth surveillanceElectronic surveillanceGynecologyPublic healthPolitical scienceEnvironmental healthNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Public health surveillance is the ongoing collection and analysis of health-related data, followed by the timely dissemination of information useful for decisions. Surveillance bias occurs when differences in the frequency of a condition are due to variations in the modalities of detection rather than to changes in the actual risk of the condition. As a result, the true burden of diseases cannot be properly assessed. This is of growing concern because surveillance activity is more and more often based on data not designed primarily for surveillance, notably data from healthcare providers. Many diseases (such as COVID-19, prostate cancer, or hypertension) are prone to surveillance bias. It also hinders quality of care monitoring.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.668
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.000

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 head0.200
GPT teacher head0.450
Teacher spread0.250 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue Médicale SuisseSame topicHealthcare Systems and PracticesFrench-language works237,207