MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409417735 · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(25)00672-5

CONSORT 2025 statement: updated guideline for reporting randomised trials

2025· review· en· W4409417735 on OpenAlexafffund
Sally Hopewell, An-Wen Chan, Gary S. Collins, Asbjørn Hróbjartsson, David Moher, Kenneth F. Schulz, R. Tunn, Rakesh Aggarwal, Michael Berkwits, Jesse A. Berlin, Nita Bhandari, Nancy J. Butcher, Marion Campbell, Runcie C W Chidebe, Diana Elbourne, Andrew Farmer, Dean Fergusson, Robert Golub, Tammy Hoffmann, John P. A. Ioannidis, Brennan C Kahan, Rachel L Knowles, Sarah E Lamb, Steff Lewis, Elizabeth Loder, Martin Offringa, Philippe Ravaud, Dawn P. Richards, Frank W. Rockhold, David L. Schriger, Nandi Siegfried, Sophie Staniszewska, Rod S Taylor, Lehana Thabane, David Torgerson, Sunita Vohra, Ian R. White, Isabelle Boutron

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMeta-analysis and systematic reviews
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaRobarts Clinical TrialsSt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonHospital for Sick ChildrenOttawa HospitalWomen's College HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersMedical Research FoundationUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel HillJawaharlal Institute Of Postgraduate Medical Education and ResearchSyddansk UniversitetCenters for Disease Control and PreventionUniversity of AberdeenUniversity of GlasgowUniversity of OxfordUniversity of ExeterSouth African Medical Research CouncilUniversity of AlbertaMedical Research CouncilLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical MedicineMcMaster UniversityOttawa Hospital Research InstituteHospital for Sick ChildrenNorthwestern UniversityUniversity of WarwickUniversity of OttawaUniversity of TorontoUniversity College LondonBond UniversityUniversity of Miami
KeywordsConsolidated Standards of Reporting TrialsGuidelineMedicineStatement (logic)MEDLINEFamily medicineRandomized controlled trialInternal medicinePolitical sciencePathology

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)0.170
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.438
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Reporting · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.830
Threshold uncertainty score0.898

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1700.438
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0070.007
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0190.027
Bibliometrics0.0180.022
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0130.005
Open science0.0090.006
Research integrity0.0130.020
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0460.029

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 head0.924
GPT teacher head0.670
Teacher spread0.254 · 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
DomainReporting
GenreMethods

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

Citations314
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueThe LancetSame topicMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsFrench-language works237,207