MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4390988942 · doi:10.1017/cjn.2023.326

CONNECTing Concussion Care with Research Across Ontario

2024· article· en· W4390988942 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Cindy Hunt, Heather M. MacKenzie, Anil Dosaj, J Zych, Maria Carmela Tartaglia, Mark Bayley, Ruth Wilcock, Karl Zabjek, Matthew J. Burke, Vicki L. Kristman, Billie Hardy, Lisa Fischer, Andrew Baker

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsLakehead UniversitySt. Michael's HospitalSunnybrook Health Science CentreToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity Health NetworkOccupational Cancer Research CentreFowler Kennedy Sport Medicine ClinicInstitute for Work & HealthToronto Western HospitalUniversity of TorontoWestern UniversityPublic Health OntarioParkwood Institute
FundersGovernment of Ontario
KeywordsConcussionStandardizationData sharingScale (ratio)PsychologyMedicineApplied psychologyPoison controlInjury preventionComputer scienceMedical emergencyAlternative medicineGeographyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Common data elements (CDEs) for concussion, as established by international bodies, are not being widely used in Ontario, resulting in significant variability in the data being assessed and collected across clinics. CDEs support standardization of care as well as large-scale data sharing for high impact research. A collaborative network – Concussion Ontario Network: Neuroinformatics to Enhance Clinical care and Translation (CONNECT) – comprised of health care professionals, researchers, members from advocacy groups, and patients was formed to establish and implement CDEs for concussion care and research. While the seeds have been planted and initial effectiveness demonstrated, future challenges exist.

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)0.044
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.070
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.821
Threshold uncertainty score0.952

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0440.070
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.009
Science and technology studies0.0140.005
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0040.015
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.153
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques→Same topicTraumatic Brain Injury Research→French-language works237,207→