MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Evidence‐based therapy in neonatology: distilling the evidence and applying it in practice*

2004· article· en· W4321429319 on OpenAlexaff
J C Sinclair

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Paediatrica · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Sciences Research and Education
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeonatologyMedicineRandomized controlled trialCochrane collaborationEvidence-based medicineBridging (networking)Evidence-based practiceIntensive care medicineMEDLINEAlternative medicineCochrane LibraryPathologyPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract : Three aspects of the role of clinical evidence in guiding therapy in the field of neonatology are presented: 1) what is embodied in the concept “evidence‐based medicine”? 2) the contribution of the Cochrane Collaboration and its Neonatal Review Group in summarizing and disseminating evidence, in the form of systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials, concerning the benefits and risks of therapies in the field of neonatology; 3) approaches to bridging the gap between the evidence per se and the uptake and application of that evidence in practice.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.245
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.291
GPT teacher head0.509
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations24
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa PaediatricaSame topicHealth Sciences Research and EducationFrench-language works237,207