MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413747882 · doi:10.1080/13623699.2025.2543234

Medical research ethics in active war and conflict zones: the case of Gaza

2025· article· en· W4413747882 on OpenAlexaff
Bilal Irfan, Osaid Alser, Nahed Al Laham, Mohammed R. Zughbur, Ahmad Ibsais, Minahil Raheel, Kaden Venugopal, Basel Tarab, Abdullah Ghali, Abdallah Abu Shammala

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine Conflict & Survival · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth and Conflict Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGaza stripPolitical scienceEngineering ethicsEngineeringAncient historyHistoryPalestine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the chaos of conflict zones like Gaza, medical research ethics faces unprecedented challenges (Bruno and Haar 2020; Chiumento et al. 2016; Sen, Hussain, and Al-Faisal 2016). The traditional pill...

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

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)0.042
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.223

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0420.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0360.055
Scholarly communication0.0270.013
Open science0.0020.017
Research integrity0.0150.020
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.320
GPT teacher head0.585
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine Conflict & SurvivalSame topicHealth and Conflict StudiesFrench-language works237,207