MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

PRISMA-COSMIN 2024: New guidance aimed to enhance the reporting quality of systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments

2024· editorial· en· W4401868844 on OpenAlexafffund
Ellen B. M. Elsman, Ami Baba, Martin Offringa

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Nursing Studies · 2024
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMeta-analysis and systematic reviews
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick Children
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsSystematic reviewOutcome (game theory)MedicineQuality (philosophy)MEDLINEMedical physicsPolitical science

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)0.252
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.606
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Reporting · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.748
Threshold uncertainty score0.922

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2520.606
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0100.008
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0230.021
Bibliometrics0.0220.014
Science and technology studies0.0040.007
Scholarly communication0.0230.008
Open science0.0160.009
Research integrity0.0220.037
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.022

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 head0.874
GPT teacher head0.668
Teacher spread0.206 · 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
DomainReporting
GenreEditorial

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

Citations13
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Nursing StudiesSame topicMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsFrench-language works237,207