MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4319459069 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-2523052/v1

Disease progression patterns of brain morphology in schizophrenia: More progressed stages in treatment-resistance

2023· preprint· en· W4319459069 on OpenAlexafffund
Shinichiro Nakajima, Daichi Sone, Alexandra L. Young, Shunichiro Shinagawa, Sakiko Tsugawa, Yusuke Iwata, Ryosuke Tarumi, Kamiyu Ogyu, Shiori Honda, Ryo Ochi, Karin Matsushita, Fumihiko Ueno, Nobuaki Hondo, Akihiro Koreki, Edgardo Torres‐Carmona, Wanna Mar, Nathan Chan, Teruki Koizumi, Hideo Kato, Keisuke Kusudo, Vincenzo De Luca, Philip Gerretsen, Gary Remington, Mitsumoto Onaya, Yoshihiro Noda, Hiroyuki Uchida, Masaru Mimura, Masahiro Shigeta, Ariel Graff‐Guerrero

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersDaiichi Sankyo EuropeJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceCentre for Addiction and Mental Health FoundationCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchJapan Agency for Medical Research and DevelopmentOtsuka PharmaceuticalMedical Research CouncilHLS TherapeuticsShionogiJapan Research Foundation for Clinical PharmacologyDainippon Sumitomo PharmaDepartment of Psychiatry, University of TorontoUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)DiseaseMorphology (biology)NeuroscienceBrain morphometryResistance (ecology)MedicinePsychologyBiologyPsychiatryInternal medicineGeneticsEcologyMagnetic resonance imaging

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.362 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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 routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueResearch Square→Same topicSchizophrenia research and treatment→French-language works237,207→