MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6890014941 · doi:10.3389/frma.2021.683212.s001

Table1_Profiling COVID-19 Genetic Research: A Data-Driven Study Utilizing Intelligent Bibliometrics.XLSX

2021· dataset· en· W6890014941 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2021
Typedataset
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPandemicSuitePublic healthPoliticsField (mathematics)Human geneticsDiseasePublic policy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>The COVID-19 pandemic constitutes an ongoing worldwide threat to human society and has caused massive impacts on global public health, the economy and the political landscape. The key to gaining control of the disease lies in understanding the genetics of SARS-CoV-2 and the disease spectrum that follows infection. This study leverages traditional and intelligent bibliometric methods to conduct a multi-dimensional analysis on 5,632 COVID-19 genetic research papers, revealing that 1) the key players include research institutions from the United States, China, Britain and Canada; 2) research topics predominantly focus on virus infection mechanisms, virus testing, gene expression related to the immune reactions and patient clinical manifestation; 3) studies originated from the comparison of SARS-CoV-2 to previous human coronaviruses, following which research directions diverge into the analysis of virus molecular structure and genetics, the human immune response, vaccine development and gene expression related to immune responses; and 4) genes that are frequently highlighted include ACE2, IL6, TMPRSS2, and TNF. Emerging genes to the COVID-19 consist of FURIN, CXCL10, OAS1, OAS2, OAS3, and ISG15. This study demonstrates that our suite of novel bibliometric tools could help biomedical researchers follow this rapidly growing field and provide substantial evidence for policymakers’ decision-making on science policy and public health administration.</p>

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmaBibliometrics
Domain: not available · Genre: Dataset
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablelow
gptInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Domain: not available · Genre: Dataset
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablehigh
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.145
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Bibliometrics, Scholarly communication, Open science, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Bibliometrics, Open science, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.291
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.145
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0390.084
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0120.026
Research integrity0.0010.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.4500.159

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 head0.756
GPT teacher head0.541
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

BibliometricsInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareCategoryBibliometricsFrench-language works237,207