MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312734077 · doi:10.5114/ppiel.2022.120041

Ethics of umbrella and basket trials in precisiononcology

2022· article· en· W4312734077 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Karolina Strzebońska

Bibliographic record

VenueProblemy Pielęgniarstwa · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Financial Impacts of Cancer
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineClinical trialInternal medicinePrecision oncologyOncologyNursingCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ENWEndNote BIBJabRef, Mendeley RISPapers, Reference Manager, RefWorks, Zotero AMA Strzebonska K. Ethics of umbrella and basket trials in precision oncology. Nursing Problems / Problemy Pielęgniarstwa. 2022;30(1):57-58. doi:10.5114/ppiel.2022.120041. APA Strzebonska, K. (2022). Ethics of umbrella and basket trials in precision oncology. Nursing Problems / Problemy Pielęgniarstwa, 30(1), 57-58. https://doi.org/10.5114/ppiel.2022.120041 Chicago Strzebonska, Karolina. 2022. "Ethics of umbrella and basket trials in precision oncology". Nursing Problems / Problemy Pielęgniarstwa 30 (1): 57-58. doi:10.5114/ppiel.2022.120041. Harvard Strzebonska, K. (2022). Ethics of umbrella and basket trials in precision oncology. Nursing Problems / Problemy Pielęgniarstwa, 30(1), pp.57-58. https://doi.org/10.5114/ppiel.2022.120041 MLA Strzebonska, Karolina. "Ethics of umbrella and basket trials in precision oncology." Nursing Problems / Problemy Pielęgniarstwa, vol. 30, no. 1, 2022, pp. 57-58. doi:10.5114/ppiel.2022.120041. Vancouver Strzebonska K. Ethics of umbrella and basket trials in precision oncology. Nursing Problems / Problemy Pielęgniarstwa. 2022;30(1):57-58. doi:10.5114/ppiel.2022.120041.

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)0.335
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.447
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.665
Threshold uncertainty score0.820

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.3350.447
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0050.019
Scholarly communication0.0180.010
Open science0.0030.007
Research integrity0.0170.019
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.007

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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.195 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
DomainMethods
GenreCommentary

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 venueProblemy PielęgniarstwaSame topicEconomic and Financial Impacts of CancerFrench-language works237,207