MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394687953 · doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2024.03.039

The consequences of the new European reclassification of non-invasive brain stimulation devices and the medical device regulations pose an existential threat to research and treatment: An invited opinion paper

2024· article· en· W4394687953 on OpenAlexafffund
Andrea Antal, Ana Ganho-Ávila, Sara Assecondi, Tracy Barbour, Jovana Bjekić, Daniel M. Blumberger, Nadia Bolognini, Jérôme Brunelin, Lorena Chanes, Matthew Dale, Raffaele Dubbioso, Giordano D’Urso, Igor Filipčić, Saša R. Filipović, Marco Hirnstein, Femke Konings, Berthold Langguth, Letizia Leocani, Majid Memarian Sorkhabi, Marc Mulder, Mika Nikander, Rafał Nowak, Antonio Oliviero, Balder Onarheim, Jacinta O’Shea, Stefano Pallanti, Fady Rachid, Joana Rajão‐Saraiva, Símone Rossi, Alexander T. Sack, Anne Sauvaget, Rik van der Scheer, Klaus Schellhorn, Aureli Soria‐Frisch, David Szekely, Hatice Tankişi, Paul Cj Taylor, Indira Tendolkar, Susanne Uusitalo, Chris Baeken

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Neurophysiology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersFundação para a Ciência e a TecnologiaNational Institutes of HealthH. Lundbeck A/SHORIZON EUROPE Framework ProgrammeServierOulun YliopistoUniversidade de CoimbraFondation Brain CanadaEuropean CommissionMinisterio de Ciencia e InnovaciónGeneralitat de CatalunyaBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungWellcome TrustIndiviorCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchPfizerCentre for Addiction and Mental Health FoundationFondazione Cassa Di Risparmio Di Trento E RoveretoEli Lilly and CompanyBrainsWayAstraZenecaDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftInstitució Catalana de Recerca i Estudis AvançatsAmerican Tinnitus Association
KeywordsTranscranial direct-current stimulationBureaucracyTranscranial magnetic stimulationBrain stimulationConstructiveStimulationMedical researchNeuroscienceMedical devicePsychologyPolitical sciencePublic relationsMedicineProcess (computing)Computer scienceLawPathologyPolitics

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.969
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.229
GPT teacher head0.459
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
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

Citations19
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueClinical NeurophysiologySame topicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesFrench-language works237,207