MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409547828 · doi:10.1007/s11136-025-03949-4

Explanation & Elaboration document of the COSMIN Reporting Guideline 2.0 for studies on measurement properties of patient-reported outcome measures

2025· article· en· W4409547828 on OpenAlexafffund
Guilherme Tavares de Arruda, Caroline B. Terwee, Ellen B. M. Elsman, Mariana Arias Ávila, Joel Gagnier, Lidwine B. Mokkink

Bibliographic record

VenueQuality of Life Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMeta-analysis and systematic reviews
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityWestern University
FundersWarwick Medical SchoolSchulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western UniversityUniversidade de PernambucoUniversitair Ziekenhuis GentCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível SuperiorSchulich School of Medicine and DentistryBrigham and Women's HospitalNational University of SingaporeUniversiteit GentUniversity of OxfordUniversity of WarwickAmsterdam University Medical CentersMcMaster UniversityUniversity College CorkNational Research CentreMassachusetts General HospitalUniversidade Federal do MaranhãoFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo
KeywordsElaborationGuidelineQuality of Life ResearchPatient-reported outcomeOutcome (game theory)MedicinePsychologyPublic healthPhysical therapyQuality of life (healthcare)NursingMathematicsPathologyPhilosophy

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)0.099
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.424
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.901
Threshold uncertainty score0.809

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0990.424
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.013
Bibliometrics0.0110.010
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0040.005
Research integrity0.0110.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2420.102

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 head0.979
GPT teacher head0.685
Teacher spread0.294 · 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

Citations20
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueQuality of Life ResearchSame topicMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsFrench-language works237,207