MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399297539 · doi:10.3389/fnhum.2024.1394374

Neurocognitive health in LGBTQIA+ older adults: current state of research and recommendations

2024· article· en· W4399297539 on OpenAlexafffund
Riccardo Manca, Jhon Alexander Moreno, Alessandra Nicoletti, Neil Henderson, Jason D. Flatt

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Human Neuroscience · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-MontréalHôpital Notre-DameUniversité de Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Institute on AgingNational Institutes of HealthAlzheimer's AssociationMichael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson's Research
KeywordsNeurocognitiveHumPsychologyNeuroscienceGerontologyPolitical scienceMedicineCognitionHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A corrigendum on: \nNeurocognitive health in LGBTQIA+ older adults: current state of research and recommendations \n \nby Manca, R., Moreno, J. A., Nicoletti, A., Henderson, N. J., and Flatt, J. D. (2024). Front. Hum. Neurosci. 18:1394374. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2024.1394374 \n \nIn the published article, an author name was incorrectly written as “John Alexander Moreno”. The correct spelling is “Jhon Alexander Moreno”. \n \nThe authors apologize for this error and state that this does not change the scientific conclusions of the article in any way. The original article has been updated.

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)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.088
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.086
Threshold uncertainty score0.171

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.088
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.005
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.007
Open science0.0060.005
Research integrity0.0070.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.005

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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.489
Teacher spread0.392 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations10
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Human NeuroscienceSame topicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and PolicyFrench-language works237,207