MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413186530 · doi:10.1016/s2352-4642(25)00185-3

Alternative consent processes in a neonatal resuscitation trial (SAIL): secondary analysis of an open-label, international, multicentre, randomised trial

2025· article· en· W4413186530 on OpenAlexaff
Louise Owen, Elizabeth E. Foglia, Sarah J. Ratcliffe, Burkhard Simma, Anup Katheria, Arjan B. te Pas, Wes Onland, Anton H. van Kaam, Martin Keszler, Haresh Kirpalani, Peter G. Davis

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet Child & Adolescent Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEthics in Clinical Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNational Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Health and Medical Research CouncilEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentMedical Research Council
KeywordsMedicineInformed consentOpen labelResuscitationClinical trialRandomized controlled trialEmergency medicineAlternative medicineSurgeryInternal 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.311
GPT teacher head0.556
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueThe Lancet Child & Adolescent HealthSame topicEthics in Clinical ResearchFrench-language works237,207