Bibliographic record
Abstract
Under a general public licence, open-source code for computer programs is made available for users to analyse, redistribute and modify, as long as they operate under the same rules. The success of the GNU/Linux operating system demonstrates that programmers are willing to invest time and expertise in open-source projects; the resulting software is stable and also evolves quickly. And user interest comes not only from medical students looking for programs for their hand-helds — cash-strapped practices and hospitals are also examining open-source software as an alternative to proprietary systems. As Douglas Carnall has argued in BMJ (www .bmj .com/cgi/content /full /321 /7267 /976), if the code is free greater resources are available for customization and customer support. Carnall's editorial provoked a lively online discussion (www.bmj.com/cgi/eletters/321/7267/976). Granting agencies are also interested. The European Union will spend 3.6 billion Euros supporting research over the next 5 to 10 years, and has placed an emphasis on projects that will yield open-source software. In April 2001, the McMaster University Department of Family Medicine Primary Care Network received $1 million from the Ontario Ministry of Health Primary Care Reform Initiative to enhance and expand OSCAR, an open-source primary health care system (www.openhealth.com/en/press/20apr01.html). SourceForge (www.sourceforge.net) hosts projects of all sizes, while the Spirit Project (www.euspirit.com) specializes in medical software. At LinuxMedNews (www.linuxmednews.com), Dr. Ignacio Valdes and fellow enthusiasts keep their fingers on the pulse with news, discussions and project lists. Vancouver-based Minoru Development Corporation maintains Openhealth (www.minoru-development.com/en/healthcare.html) . Most software intended for desktops or mainframes (as opposed to hand-held computers) is still at the pre-release stage. Exceptions are the beta versions of FreePM (www.freepm.org), open-source practice management software that was recently reviewed at LinuxMedNews. Tk_familypractice (www .psnw .com /~alcald#informatics) provides patient record and other software for physicians.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.268 | 0.229 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".