MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4399710344 · doi:10.1016/j.cjca.2024.05.030

Reply to Cheseks et al.—Expert Opinions For Refractory Cardiac Arrest: Double Sequential External Defibrillation, Vector Change, and eCPR

2024· letter· en· W4399710344 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Sean van Diepen, Michel R. Le May, Patricia Alfaro, Michael Goldfarb, Adriana Luk, Rebecca Mathew, Maude Peretz-Larochelle, Erin Rayner‐Hartley, Juan Russo, Janek Senaratne, Craig Ainsworth, Emilie P. Belley‐Côté, Christopher B. Fordyce, Julie Kromm, Christopher B. Overgaard, Gregory Schnell, Graham C. Wong

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Cardiology · 2024
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
Canadian institutionsSouthlake Regional Health CenterUniversity of CalgaryVancouver General HospitalMcMaster UniversityUniversity of British ColumbiaRoyal Columbian HospitalMcGill UniversityUniversity of OttawaJewish General HospitalUniversity of TorontoLibin Cardiovascular Institute of AlbertaUniversity Health NetworkTed Rogers Centre for Heart ResearchUniversity of Alberta
FundersCenter for Computational Sciences, University of KentuckyCanadian Cardiovascular Society
KeywordsMedicineDefibrillationVentricular fibrillationRefractory (planetary science)Internal medicineCardiologyCardiopulmonary resuscitationResuscitationSurgery

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0600.033
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.009

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.268 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Cardiology→Same topicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation→French-language works237,207→