MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406352698 · doi:10.5195/jmla.2025.2099

Revisiting JMLA case reports: a publication category for driving innovation in health sciences librarianship

2025· editorial· en· W4406352698 on OpenAlexaff
Jill Boruff, Michelle Kraft, Alexander J. Carroll

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Medical Library Association JMLA · 2025
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Sciences Research and Education
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLibrary scienceValue (mathematics)Association (psychology)SociologyPolitical sciencePsychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the April 2019 issue (Vol. 106 No. 3), the Journal of the Medical Library Association (JMLA) debuted its Case Report publication category. In the years following this decision, the Case Reports category has grown into an integral component of JMLA. In this editorial, the JMLA Editorial Team highlights the value of case reports and outlines strategies authors can use to draft impactful manuscripts for this category.

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)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.162
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Evaluation · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.975
Threshold uncertainty score0.130

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.162
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.004
Scholarly communication0.0120.005
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0180.018
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.008

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.461
Teacher spread0.393 · 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
DomainEvaluation
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Medical Library Association JMLASame topicHealth Sciences Research and EducationFrench-language works237,207