MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384563737 · doi:10.1016/s2589-790x(23)00162-2

Announcement-Call for Papers: Why Her Heart Matters: Evidence-Based Practice and Practice-Based Evidence

2023· paratext· en· W4384563737 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sharon L. Mulvagh, Colleen M. Norris

Bibliographic record

VenueCJC Open · 2023
Typeparatext
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Sciences Research and Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaDalhousie UniversityQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyComputer scienceMedicineData science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Review 1. What's new in SCAD? 2. Meeting the gap with Women Heart Health centers/clinics -The associations of sex and gender and women's heart health 3. New postpartum CVD prevention guideline 4. Patient engagement in women's CVD health 5. KT of evidence into practice through the Can Women's Heart Health Alliance and the Can Women's Heart Health Centre 6. Incorporating women's heart health into medicine/nursing curriculum 7. Unique aspects of Women's Cardiovascular Valvular Health 8. Female specific aspects of Women's Aortic Heart Health 9. Women with lived experience (WLE) in every aspect of women's heart health care 10.The Development of Chest Pain ER Protocols for Women 11.The timing hypothesis: HRT, menopause and CVD care for women 12. Prevalence and Comorbidities of PCOS in Alberta 13.Female Sex and Gender factors associated with outcomes of Cardiovascular Health 14. Issues related to access, delivery, and costs of cardiovascular care of women Systematic Review/Meta-Analysis 15.MINOCA/INOCA pathophysiology of heart disease in women Original Article 16.Women-focused cardiac rehabilitation delivery around the world and program needs to support broader implementation

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)0.033
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.139
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.168
Threshold uncertainty score0.561

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0330.139
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.006
Bibliometrics0.0080.007
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0100.013
Open science0.0040.005
Research integrity0.0130.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1680.063

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 head0.417
GPT teacher head0.585
Teacher spread0.168 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCJC OpenSame topicHealth Sciences Research and EducationFrench-language works237,207