MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405430762 · doi:10.62212/snahp.173

Promouvoir l’intégrité en recherche : des principes à la pratique dans les revues scientifiques

2024· article· fr· W4405430762 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Maria Cecília Bueno Jayme Gallani

Bibliographic record

VenueScience of Nursing and Health Practices · 2024
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldDecision Sciences
Topicscientometrics and bibliometrics research
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Promouvoir l’intégrité en recherche : des principes à la pratique dans les revues scientifiques. Un article de la revue Science of Nursing and Health Practices / Science infirmière et pratiques en santé (Volume 7, numéro 2, 2024, p. 1-117) diffusée par la plateforme Érudit.

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)0.457
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.453
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Evaluation · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score0.669

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.4570.453
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.004
Bibliometrics0.0110.012
Science and technology studies0.0100.085
Scholarly communication0.0490.057
Open science0.0070.025
Research integrity0.0220.037
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.005

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 head0.898
GPT teacher head0.728
Teacher spread0.169 · 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
DomainEvaluation
GenreEmpirical

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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScience of Nursing and Health PracticesSame topicscientometrics and bibliometrics researchFrench-language works237,207