MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387968863 · doi:10.1186/s12910-023-00957-2

Preparing ethical review systems for emergencies: next steps

2023· article· en· W4387968863 on OpenAlexaff
Katharine Wright, Nic Aagaard, Amr Ali, Caesar Atuire, Michael Campbell, Katherine Littler, Ahmed Mandil, Roli Mathur, Joseph Okeibunor, Andreas Reis, Maria Alexandra Ribeiro, Carla Saénz, Mamello Sekhoacha, Ehsan Shamsi Gooshki, Jerome Amir Singh, Ross Upshur

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Medical Ethics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEthics in Clinical Research
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
FundersWorld Health OrganizationU.S. Department of State
KeywordsPhilosophy of medicinePreparednessCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PandemicEngineering ethics2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)BioethicsPolitical scienceEnvironmental resource managementManagement scienceMedicineEngineeringLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ethical review systems need to build on their experiences of COVID-19 research to enhance their preparedness for future pandemics. Recommendations from representatives from over twenty countries include: improving relationships across the research ecosystem; demonstrating willingness to reform and adapt systems and processes; and making the case robustly for better resourcing.

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)0.082
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.844
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch, Research integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.780
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0820.844
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0060.018
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.755
GPT teacher head0.649
Teacher spread0.106 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Medical EthicsSame topicEthics in Clinical ResearchFrench-language works237,207