North American Clinical Trials Network for Spinal Cord Injury Registry: Methodology and Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The North American Clinical Trials Network (NACTN) for Spinal Cord Injury (SCI) is a consortium of neurosurgery departments at university affiliated hospitals with medical, nursing, and rehabilitation personnel who are skilled in the assessment, evaluation, and management of SCI. NACTN was established with the goal of consistently advancing the quality of life of people with SCI through clinical trials of new therapies that provide robust evidence of safety and effectiveness. A prospective multi-center Registry was created to collect the natural course of the acute traumatic SCI patient from time of injury to 12 months follow-up. NACTN's network of hospitals enrolls a significant number of patients, defines and adheres to standard protocols, and provides the infrastructure and highly skilled personnel to conduct trials of therapy for SCI. Registry data have been used by academic institutions and by the biotechnology and pharmaceutical sectors to create comparison datasets for Phase I clinical trials of new therapies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.135 | 0.246 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.020 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.025 | 0.005 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".