MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415295930 · doi:10.3389/fmed.2025.1710876

Correction: Harnessing the promises of cell therapy, gene therapy, and regenerative medicine in Québec, Canada

2025· article· en· W4415295930 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jean‐Sébastien Delisle, Diane Fournier, Kim Santerre, Samuel Rochette, Ma’n H. Zawati, Maude Dumont-Lagacé, Simon Turcotte, Jason Robert Guertin, Patrick Vermette, Jacques P. Tremblay, Maxime Parisotto, Christian Beauséjour, Jean‐François Gélinas, Louisa Petropoulos, Natasha Kekre, Mélanie Dieudé

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBiomedical Ethics and Regulation
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalComputer Research Institute of MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineUniversité de SherbrookeUniversité LavalCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de SherbrookeMcGill University Health CentreCentre hospitalier universitaire de QuébecHéma-QuébecUniversité de MontréalStem Cell NetworkHôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemont
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRegenerative medicineGeneCellStem cellPrecision medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the published article, the author contribution and conflict of interest statements were missing the information of author Jean-François Gélinas, who was erroneously excluded from the author list.A correction has been made to the section Author Contributions to add the contributions of Jean-François Gélinas. The added sentence appears below: "J-FG: Data curation, Formal Analysis, Writing -review and editing."A correction has also been made to the section Conflict of Interest to add information on author Jean-François Gélinas. This sentence previously stated :"LP was employed by Centre C3i Inc."The corrected sentence appears below: "J-FG is and LP was employed by Centre C3i Inc."

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.084
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.964
Threshold uncertainty score0.524

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.084
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.005
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0090.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0380.016

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in MedicineSame topicBiomedical Ethics and RegulationFrench-language works237,207