MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4317840362 · doi:10.1136/bmj.p152

Assessing the relevance of research for clinicians

2023· letter· en· W4317840362 on OpenAlexaff
Roland Grad

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ · 2023
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
Topicscientometrics and bibliometrics research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelevance (law)PsychologyMedicinePolitical science

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)0.445
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Bibliometrics
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Evaluation · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.994
Threshold uncertainty score0.324

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0610.445
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0060.005
Science and technology studies0.0090.013
Scholarly communication0.0160.013
Open science0.0040.006
Research integrity0.1200.079
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.011

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 head0.924
GPT teacher head0.753
Teacher spread0.170 · 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 designObservational
DomainEvaluation
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueBMJ→Same topicscientometrics and bibliometrics research→French-language works237,207→