MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410164870 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-6148397/v1

Effects of exercise training among adults with multiple sclerosis Protocol for a systematic review that informs an updated prescriptive guideline

2025· review· en· W4410164870 on OpenAlexaff
Louise Declerck, Kathleen A. Martin Ginis, Amy Cheung, Brenda Jeng, Peixuan Zheng, Trinh L. T. Huynh, Amelia Brunskill, Robert W. Motl

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Research
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Institutes of HealthBelgian American Educational Foundation
KeywordsGuidelineProtocol (science)Multiple sclerosisSystematic reviewTraining (meteorology)Physical medicine and rehabilitationMedicinePsychologyPhysical therapyMEDLINEMedical educationComputer scienceAlternative medicinePolitical sciencePathologyPsychiatryGeography

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)0.049
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.090
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.258

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0490.090
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.021
Bibliometrics0.0060.005
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0090.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.005

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 head0.121
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.310 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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 abstractno

Explore more

Same venueResearch SquareSame topicFibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome ResearchFrench-language works237,207