MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401632013 · doi:10.1159/000540604

Lack of Blinding May Affect Objective Outcomes in Trials on Neonatal Ventilation

2024· letter· en· W4401632013 on OpenAlexaff
Matteo Bruschettini, Georg M. Schmölzer, Nai Ming Lai, Souvik Mitra, Peter G. Davis, Roger F. Soll

Bibliographic record

VenueNeonatology · 2024
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal Respiratory Health Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlindingMedicineAffect (linguistics)Intensive care medicineVentilation (architecture)Mechanical ventilationPediatricsClinical trialAnesthesiaInternal medicinePsychology

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)0.266
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.676
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.995
Threshold uncertainty score0.905

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2660.676
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.004
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.009
Scholarly communication0.0070.007
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0520.024
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.005

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 head0.198
GPT teacher head0.490
Teacher spread0.291 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
DomainMethods
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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueNeonatologySame topicNeonatal Respiratory Health ResearchFrench-language works237,207