MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4403189984 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-4456571/v1

Rationale and protocol of the LEAD 2.0 study: A randomized controlled trial assessing the feasibility of a virtually-delivered 6-month exercise and nutrition intervention in older adults with subjective cognitive decline (SCD)

2024· preprint· en· W4403189984 on OpenAlexaff
Bobby Neudorf, Noah Koblinsky, Krista A. Power, Malcom Binns, Alexandra Fiocco, Shlomit Rotenberg, Susan Marzolini, Paul Oh, Jane S Thornton, Fatim Ajwani, Kylie Sullivan, Stéphanie Chevalier, Caryl Russell, Guylaine Ferland, Nicole D. Anderson, Laura E. Middleton

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMcGill UniversityWestern UniversityUniversity of TorontoToronto Metropolitan UniversityUniversity of OttawaToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialIntervention (counseling)Physical therapyProtocol (science)MedicineCognitionGerontologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationAlternative medicinePsychiatrySurgery

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)0.052
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.273

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0520.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0080.006
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.005
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0050.008
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0100.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0540.017

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.396 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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 abstractno

Explore more

Same venueResearch Square→Same topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research→French-language works237,207→