MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407042994 · doi:10.1017/jme.2024.169

Far from Home: Managing Incidental Findings in Field Research with Portable MRI

2024· article· en· W4407042994 on OpenAlexaff
Susan M. Wolf, Judy Illes

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEthics in Clinical Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Institutes of HealthNational Institute of Mental HealthUniversity of Minnesota
KeywordsNeuroimagingWarrantHealth careInstitutionField (mathematics)PopulationPsychologyMedicineMedical educationInternet privacyPsychiatryComputer sciencePolitical scienceBusinessEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Portable MRI for neuroimaging research in remote field settings can reach populations previously excluded from research, including communities underrepresented in current brain neuroscience databases and marginalized in health care. However, research conducted far from a medical institution and potentially in populations facing barriers to health care access raises the question of how to manage incidental findings (IFs) that may warrant clinical workup. Researchers should not withhold information about IFs from historically excluded and underserved population when members consent to receive it, and instead should facilitate access to information and a pathway to clinical care.

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)0.087
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.231
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score0.458

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0870.231
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.013
Scholarly communication0.0110.016
Open science0.0040.015
Research integrity0.0070.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.544
GPT teacher head0.609
Teacher spread0.064 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
DomainMethods
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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Law Medicine & EthicsSame topicEthics in Clinical ResearchFrench-language works237,207