MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4361190261 · doi:10.1111/bcpt.13862

The state of deprescribing research: How did we get here?

2023· article· en· W4361190261 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBasic & Clinical Pharmacology & Toxicology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Health and Medical Research CouncilNational Institute on AgingNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsDeprescribingBeers CriteriaGeriatricsPresentation (obstetrics)PolypharmacyMedicinePharmacologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dr Reeve receives honoraria for co-authoring a chapter on deprescribing in UpToDate and honorarium from the Society of Hospital Pharmacists of Australia (leading workshops on deprescribing). Dr Steinman receives honoraria from UpToDate for chapter authorship and from the American Geriatrics Society for service on the AGS Beers Criteria update panel. The authors have authored and collaborated with authors of several of the studies mentioned in this commentary. This manuscript is based on a presentation given by Dr Reeve at the First International Conference on Deprescribing (ICOD), Kolding, Denmark, September 2022.

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.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.381
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.519
GPT teacher head0.566
Teacher spread0.047 · 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