MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313544762 · doi:10.1097/jxx.0000000000000818

Happy birthday to us!

2023· editorial· en· W4313544762 on OpenAlexaff
Kim Curry

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners · 2023
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicNursing Diagnosis and Documentation
Canadian institutionsWiLAN (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsViewpointsNurse practitionersLibrary scienceComputer scienceArtVisual artsLawPolitical scienceHealth care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Editor-in-Chief Correspondence: Kim Curry, PhD, FNP-C, FAANP. E-mail: [email protected] Competing interests: The author reports no conflicts of interest. Author's note: Parts of this editorial will be included in a blog post to be featured on Nursology.net to highlight the history and significance of nursing journals. Viewpoints shared are those of the writer and not the editorial team, the AANP or JAANP.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.213
Threshold uncertainty score0.712

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2130.182

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.320 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Association of Nurse PractitionersSame topicNursing Diagnosis and DocumentationFrench-language works237,207