MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392858819 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-4088062/v1

Rigorous Quality Assessment of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Microfluidic Technologies as Rapid Tests during COVID-19 using the AGREE II Instrument

2024· preprint· en· W4392858819 on OpenAlexafffund
Hammad Shahid, Kaitlyn Ramsay

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicBiosimilars and Bioanalytical Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakClinical PracticeQuality (philosophy)MicrofluidicsMedical physicsComputer scienceMedicineVirologyNanotechnologyMaterials sciencePhysicsInternal medicineFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Microfluidic technologies offer a paradigm shift in healthcare diagnostics and monitoring, with potential implications across a multitude of clinical scenarios. Their optimal implementation hinges on robust, evidence-based clinical guidelines. This study provides an in-depth quality assessment of existing guidelines for microfluidic technologies used to rapidly diagnose COVID-19 utilizing the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument.

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)0.436
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.561
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Evaluation · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.564
Threshold uncertainty score0.695

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.4360.561
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
Bibliometrics0.0070.005
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0110.003
Open science0.0050.007
Research integrity0.0050.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.519
GPT teacher head0.636
Teacher spread0.117 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
DomainEvaluation
GenreEmpirical

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 venueResearch SquareSame topicBiosimilars and Bioanalytical MethodsFrench-language works237,207