MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416145595 · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd015679

Supplementary search methods versus bibliographic database searching to identify studies and study reports

2025· article· en· W4416145595 on OpenAlexaff
Chris Cooper, Daniela C. Gonçalves, Christopher James Rose, Rachel Court, Zahra Premji, Anna Brown, E. Tomlinson, Jane O'Sullivan, Joe Carroll, Nadine Freitag, K. H. Nothnagel, Annika Queder, Rachel James, Catalina Lopez Manzano, Samuel Haftel, Ute Schauberger

Bibliographic record

VenueCochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMeta-analysis and systematic reviews
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProtocol (science)MEDLINECitationResource (disambiguation)Keyword searchClinical trialBibliographic databaseAgency (philosophy)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (methodology). The objectives are as follows: To assess the effectiveness and resource requirements of supplementary search methods compared with bibliographic database searching for identifying studies and study reports. The supplementary search methods we will consider are: citation searching; contacting study authors; handsearching; regulatory agency sources and clinical study reports; clinical trials registries; web searching.

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)0.192
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.484
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.808
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1920.484
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.011
Bibliometrics0.0400.036
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0090.009
Open science0.0060.008
Research integrity0.0080.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.3990.056

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 head0.775
GPT teacher head0.659
Teacher spread0.117 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designSystematic review
DomainMethods
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCochrane Database of Systematic ReviewsSame topicMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsFrench-language works237,207