MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311561590 · doi:10.1016/j.hlc.2022.11.001

Rationale and Design of a Study to Test the Effect of Personal Protective Aids on Hypertension and Diabetes in People Living With High Levels of Air Pollution—Study Protocol

2022· article· en· W4311561590 on OpenAlexaff
Dweep Barbhaya, Jennifer Tran, Aditya Khetan, Vittal Hejjaji, Supreme Jain, Chee M. Chan, Anubha Goel

Bibliographic record

VenueHeart Lung and Circulation · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityHamilton Health Sciences
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDiabetes mellitusBlood pressureCrossover studyIntervention (counseling)Randomized controlled trialEnvironmental healthInternal medicineNursingPlacebo

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.061
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.325

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0610.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0070.006
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.006
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0050.003
Research integrity0.0080.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.008

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueHeart Lung and CirculationSame topicAir Quality and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207