MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4309021799 · doi:10.1016/j.jad.2022.11.033

The Motivation and Energy Inventory (MEI): Analysis of the clinically relevant response threshold in patients with major depressive disorder and emotional blunting using data from the COMPLETE study

2022· article· en· W4309021799 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Cronquist Christensen, Michael Adair, Henrik Loft, Roger S. McIntyre

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Affective Disorders · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBiofield Effects and Biophysics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersH. Lundbeck A/S
KeywordsVortioxetineMajor depressive disorderClinical Global ImpressionMinimal clinically important differenceAntidepressantPsychologyReuptake inhibitorSerotonin reuptake inhibitorRating scaleInternal medicinePsychiatryAnxietyMedicineCognitionRandomized controlled trialDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OpenAlex records an abstract for this work, but it could not be fetched just now.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.255 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Affective Disorders→Same topicBiofield Effects and Biophysics→French-language works237,207→