MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413269905 · doi:10.1053/j.akdh.2025.03.003

Inequities in Research and Publication: A Call for Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion

2025· review· en· W4413269905 on OpenAlexafffund
Divya Bajpai, Eranga Wijewickrama, Urmila Anand, Arpita Ray Chaudhury, Shaifali Sandal

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Kidney Disease and Health · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiversity and Career in Medicine
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - Santé
KeywordsMentorshipInclusion (mineral)RealmEquity (law)Ethnic groupDiversity (politics)Health equityPublic relationsPolitical scienceInequalitySociologySocial scienceLawHealth care

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)0.094
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Open science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Incentives · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.997
Threshold uncertainty score0.259

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0490.094
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0080.009
Science and technology studies0.0020.012
Scholarly communication0.0100.021
Open science0.0030.010
Research integrity0.0080.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.325
GPT teacher head0.556
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
DomainIncentives
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 routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Kidney Disease and HealthSame topicDiversity and Career in MedicineFrench-language works237,207