MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400568809 · doi:10.1007/s00520-024-08678-x

Correction to: Interactive digital tools to support empowerment of people with cancer: a systematic literature review

2024· erratum· en· W4400568809 on OpenAlexaff
Leena Tuominen, Helena Leino‐Kilpi, Jenna Poraharju, Daniela Cabutto, Carme Carrión, Leeni Lehtiö, Sónia Moretó, Minna Stolt, Virpi Sulosaari, Heli Virtanen

Bibliographic record

VenueSupportive Care in Cancer · 2024
Typeerratum
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHealthcare during COVID-19 Pandemic
Canadian institutionsCancer Care Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNursing researchMedicinePatient EmpowermentPain medicineHealth informaticsEmpowermentAlternative medicineSystematic reviewMEDLINENursingPublic health

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)0.031
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.268
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.192

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0310.268
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.004
Bibliometrics0.0110.011
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0050.005
Research integrity0.0110.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0570.016

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.336 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueSupportive Care in CancerSame topicHealthcare during COVID-19 PandemicFrench-language works237,207