MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308013166 · doi:10.2196/43520

Correction: Web-Based Software Tools for Systematic Literature Review in Medicine: Systematic Search and Feature Analysis

2022· erratum· en· W4308013166 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kathryn Cowie, Asad Rahmatullah, Nicole Hardy, Karl Holub, Kevin M. Kallmes

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Medical Informatics · 2022
Typeerratum
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSystematic reviewInformation retrievalFeature (linguistics)SoftwareData scienceWorld Wide WebMEDLINEData miningProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In "Web-Based Software Tools for Systematic Literature Review in Medicine: Systematic Search and Feature Analysis" (JMIR Med Inform 2022;10(5):e33219) the authors noted some errors and made the following corrections:1.For the "Access" category in Table 4, features included free, living, public outputs, and multiple users.In the originally published article, the feature "public outputs" was not counted, understating the total features offered.Therefore, Table 4 has been revised, as follows:

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)0.052
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.470
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.948
Threshold uncertainty score0.304

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0520.470
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0060.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.006
Bibliometrics0.0180.015
Science and technology studies0.0070.007
Scholarly communication0.0130.007
Open science0.0090.007
Research integrity0.0160.019
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0910.043

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.470
Teacher spread0.384 · 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 designSystematic review
DomainMethods
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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Medical InformaticsSame topicArtificial Intelligence in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207