MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4392503207 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3525566/v1

Knowledge and practices of youth awareness on death and dying in school settings: a systematic scoping review protocol

2024· preprint· en· W4392503207 on OpenAlexafffund
Émilie Allard, Clémence Coupat, Sabrina Lessard, Noémie Therrien, Claire Godard‐Sebillotte, Dimitri Létourneau, Olivia Nguyen, Andréanne Côté, Gabrielle Fortin, Serge Daneault, Maryse Soulières, Josiane Le Gall, Sylvie Fortin

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalUniversité de Montréal
FundersUniversité de Montréal
KeywordsProtocol (science)PsychologyMedical educationMedicineSociologyAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.146
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.174
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.146
Threshold uncertainty score0.770

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1460.174
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.017
Bibliometrics0.0200.014
Science and technology studies0.0060.006
Scholarly communication0.0080.007
Open science0.0040.008
Research integrity0.0080.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0460.006

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 head0.408
GPT teacher head0.614
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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 abstractno

Explore more

Same venueResearch Square→Same topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues→French-language works237,207→