MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385294153 · doi:10.3399/bjgp23x734433

Primary care: the sleeping giant of research delivery

2023· letter· en· W4385294153 on OpenAlexaff
Philip Evans, Morag Burton, Emma Tonner, Julie Robin Solomon, Simon Royal, Sarah Crawshaw

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of General Practice · 2023
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPrimary Care and Health Outcomes
Canadian institutionsInnovation Cluster (Canada)
FundersNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsMedicinePrimary carePrimary health careData scienceWorld Wide WebFamily medicineComputer scienceEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Primary care: the sleeping giant of research deliveryWe write in response to the recent editorial by Dickson and colleagues 1 advocating the expansion of research in primary care.We agree that the increasing transfer of clinical care from secondary to primary care, the frequency of consultation, and the increasing care of chronic disease by primary care mean that primary care should be the 'go to' setting for research studies.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.019
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 head0.133
GPT teacher head0.470
Teacher spread0.337 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of General PracticeSame topicPrimary Care and Health OutcomesFrench-language works237,207