MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390638606 · doi:10.1093/eurjcn/zvad126

Why isn’t frailty being assessed on an ongoing basis within the cardiac setting?

2024· letter· en· W4390638606 on OpenAlexaffabout
Suzanne Fredericks

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing · 2024
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMetropolitan areaGerontologyNursing homesLibrary scienceFamily medicineNursingPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Journal Article Corrected proof Why isn’t frailty being assessed on an ongoing basis within the cardiac setting? Get access Suzanne Fredericks Suzanne Fredericks Daphne Cockwell School of Nursing, Toronto Metropolitan University, 350 Victoria St., Toronto, ON M5B 2K3, Canada Corresponding author. Tel: +416 979 5000 ext. 557978, Email: sfrederi@torontomu.ca https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7462-636X Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar European Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing, zvad126, https://doi.org/10.1093/eurjcn/zvad126 Published: 06 January 2024 Article history Received: 27 November 2023 Accepted: 28 November 2023 Corrected and typeset: 06 January 2024 Published: 06 January 2024

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), 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 score0.092
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.005
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.008
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.248 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Cardiovascular NursingSame topicFrailty in Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207