MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406725553 · doi:10.1136/bmj.r133

Dear sceptics of patient engagement in research

2025· editorial· en· W4406725553 on OpenAlexaff
Dawn P. Richards

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ · 2025
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMental Health and Patient Involvement
Canadian institutionsGlycemic Index Laboratories
Fundersnot available
KeywordsData scienceSkepticismComputer scienceWorld Wide WebMedicinePhilosophyEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dawn P Richards challenges some of the common objections to patient engagement in research

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)0.079
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.284
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.921
Threshold uncertainty score0.419

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0790.284
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.006
Bibliometrics0.0070.005
Science and technology studies0.0150.018
Scholarly communication0.0270.016
Open science0.0100.007
Research integrity0.0880.093
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.012

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 head0.469
GPT teacher head0.595
Teacher spread0.125 · 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
DomainMethods
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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJSame topicMental Health and Patient InvolvementFrench-language works237,207