MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4363651625 · doi:10.1503/cmaj.148341-l

The need to streamline approval processes for clinical research in Canada

2023· letter· en· W4363651625 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Celeste M. Lumia, Samir Gupta, Don D. Sin, Andrea S. Gershon

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Medical Association Journal · 2023
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Work & HealthHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoSt. Paul's HospitalUniversity of British ColumbiaSt. Michael's HospitalSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Medicine2019-20 coronavirus outbreakClinical researchData scienceComputer sciencePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We, members of the Canadian Respiratory Research Network Long COVID-19 Study,[1][1] want to thank Murthy and colleagues[2][2] for their important commentary highlighting the need to improve Canada’s current research infrastructure to support national clinical research studies. This discussion is

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)0.043
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.184
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Evaluation · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.957
Threshold uncertainty score0.788

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0430.184
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0160.013
Scholarly communication0.0120.007
Open science0.0070.004
Research integrity0.0470.053
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.005

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 head0.230
GPT teacher head0.450
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Medical Association Journal→Same topicSepsis Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→