MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389206595 · doi:10.56885/begl1924

Best Practice Recommendation Updates 2024: Methodology For Developing Foundations Of Best Practice For Skin and Wound Management

2023· article· en· W4389206595 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Janet L. Kuhnke, Cathy Burrows, Robyn Evans, Mariam Botros, Jasmine Hoover, Ian Corks

Bibliographic record

VenueWound Care Canada · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClinical practice guidelines implementation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBest practiceClinical PracticeExpert opinionWork (physics)Resource (disambiguation)Best evidenceComputer scienceKnowledge managementMedical educationMedicineEngineeringPolitical scienceNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Best Practice Recommendations are the most popular resource developed by Wounds Canada and are used by frontline clinicians, students and policy makers to inform their practice. The Best Practice Recommendation Updates 2024 build on the work of previous authors and editorial teams and incorporate expert opinion, clinical experience and the latest available research. This article summarizes the methodology used in the development of the Recommendations.

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)0.286
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.772
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.286
Threshold uncertainty score0.881

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2860.772
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.007
Bibliometrics0.0220.026
Science and technology studies0.0070.005
Scholarly communication0.0250.010
Open science0.0090.012
Research integrity0.0160.020
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0300.023

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 head0.286
GPT teacher head0.518
Teacher spread0.232 · 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
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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 venueWound Care CanadaSame topicClinical practice guidelines implementationFrench-language works237,207