MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414035534 · doi:10.31128/ajgp-07-24-7358

Supporting family medicine residents to publish: A call for action

2025· article· en· W4414035534 on OpenAlexaff
Apichai Wattanapisit, Nicholas Pimlott, Charlie Guiang, Kulamakan Kulasegaram, Chirk Jenn Ng, Chaisiri Angkurawaranon, Abbas Ghavam-Rassoul

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Journal of General Practice · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealth and Medical Research Impacts
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's HospitalUniversity of TorontoWomen's College Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCall to actionAction (physics)PublicationMedicinePsychologyBusinessAdvertising

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Australian Journal of General Practice (AJGP) aims to provide relevant, evidence-based, clearly articulated information to Australian general practitioners (GPs) to assist them in providing the highest quality patient care

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)0.125
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.231
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Incentives · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.875
Threshold uncertainty score0.663

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1250.231
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.008
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0310.028
Scholarly communication0.0380.058
Open science0.0170.046
Research integrity0.2140.133
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0650.023

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 head0.315
GPT teacher head0.576
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 designNot applicable
DomainIncentives
GenreCommentary

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 abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian Journal of General PracticeSame topicHealth and Medical Research ImpactsFrench-language works237,207