MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Clinical Practice Guidelines: Quality, Breadth, and Currency

2025· article· en· W4411330811 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher J. Ryerson, Ann L. Jennerich, Linda Nici, Ganesh Raghu, Marya Ghazipura, Shawn D. Aaron, A. Ioana Cristea, Charles S. Dela Cruz, Michael Drummond, Zarmina Ehsan, Scott E. Evans, David Feller‐Kopman, Don Hayes, Narayan P. Iyer, Alex R. Jenkins, Anne E. Holland, Susan S. Jacobs, Jerry A. Krishnan, Madalina Macrea, Eyal Oren, Robert L. Owens, Bram Rochwerg, Charlie Strange, Kevin C. Wilson

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the American Thoracic Society · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClinical practice guidelines implementation
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of OttawaMcGill UniversityOttawa HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
KeywordsMedicineClinical PracticeQuality (philosophy)MEDLINEIntensive care medicineFamily medicine

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)0.233
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.658
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.767
Threshold uncertainty score0.946

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2330.658
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0240.018
Science and technology studies0.0030.010
Scholarly communication0.0210.024
Open science0.0040.011
Research integrity0.0080.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.607
GPT teacher head0.692
Teacher spread0.085 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
DomainMethods
GenreReview

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of the American Thoracic SocietySame topicClinical practice guidelines implementationFrench-language works237,207