MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4310690251 · doi:10.22374/cjgim.v17i4.638

Reporting Risk: From Math to Meaning

2022· article· en· W4310690251 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Lauren Lapointe‐Shaw, Glenda Babe, Peter C. Austin, Andrew P. Costa, Aaron Jones

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of General Internal Medicine · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsSt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonImpactSinai Health SystemMcMaster UniversityWomen's College HospitalSt Joseph's Health CareUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of TorontoSt Joseph's Health Centre
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of TorontoWomen's College HospitalOntario Ministry of Health and Long-Term CareHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsObservational studyHumanitiesMedicinePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, we discuss risk reporting and presentation in observational healthcare research. Reported measures of risk should facilitate clinical understanding. Although odds ratios are mathematically advantageous, they do not facilitate clinical understanding. Adjusted relative risk and risk difference are intuitive and clinically meaningful measures that can be readily obtained from any regression model using average marginal effects. Statistical summary measures or graphical displays that incorporate prevalence of risk factors can also be used to better identify the most important contributors to a target condition.

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)0.041
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.179
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Reporting · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.959
Threshold uncertainty score0.216

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0410.179
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.023
Scholarly communication0.0130.026
Open science0.0030.007
Research integrity0.0040.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.003

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 head0.328
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.089 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
DomainReporting
GenreMethods

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 routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of General Internal MedicineSame topicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207