MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393990600 · doi:10.7189/jogh.14.03024

Navigating data standards in public health: A brief report from a data-standards meeting

2024· article· en· W4393990600 on OpenAlexaff
Heather Hufstedler, Yannik Roell, Andressa Peña, Ankur Krishnan, Ian Green, Adriano Barbosa-Silva, Andreas Kremer, Clair Blacketer, Isabel Fortier, Kit Howard, Bess LeRoy, Eza Hafeza, David Baorto, Morris A. Swertz, Lauren Maxwell, Thomas Jaenisch

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Global Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEthics in Clinical Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInteroperabilitySNOMED CTHealth dataData scienceFoundation (evidence)Public healthComputer scienceMedicineWorld Wide WebTerminologyHealth carePolitical scienceNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Data standardization offers significant benefits for industry and regulators alike, suggesting that it should be easy. In practice, however, the process has been hard and slow moving. Moving from an abstract incentive-based analysis to one focused on institutional detail reveals myriad frictions favoring the status quo despite foregone gains – Richard Berner and Kathryn Judge […]

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)0.110
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.117
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.890
Threshold uncertainty score0.580

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1100.117
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0090.006
Scholarly communication0.0170.021
Open science0.0040.010
Research integrity0.0320.048
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.583
GPT teacher head0.680
Teacher spread0.097 · 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
DomainMethods
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

Citations15
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Global HealthSame topicEthics in Clinical ResearchFrench-language works237,207