MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401380626 · doi:10.51987/evidencia.v27i3.7122

Using a simplified version of Shaughnessy's guideline trustworthiness tool (G-TRUST) to help clinicians choose the most relevant guidelines for their practice

2024· article· en· W4401380626 on OpenAlexaff
René Wittmer, Guylène Thériault, Genevieve Bois

Bibliographic record

VenueEvidencia actualizacion en la práctica ambulatoria · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClinical practice guidelines implementation
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversité de MontréalWomen in Science and Engineering Newfoundland and Labrador
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGuidelineTrustworthinessPsychologyComputer scienceMedicineSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reliance on trusted secondary sources, such as clinical practice guidelines, has emerged as a pragmatic solution for evidence-based practice. This editorial underscores the necessity of adapting medical education to equip clinicians with skills aligned with practical clinical demands and introduces a streamlined version of Shaughnessy's G-TRUST tool tailored for swift guideline assessment in clinical settings.

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)0.065
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.491
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.935
Threshold uncertainty score0.344

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0650.491
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0070.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0090.007
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0090.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.004

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 head0.203
GPT teacher head0.512
Teacher spread0.309 · 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
GenreMethods

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvidencia actualizacion en la práctica ambulatoriaSame topicClinical practice guidelines implementationFrench-language works237,207