Supplementary data for the manuscript entitled “Reliable data collection in participatory trials to assess digital healthcare apps”
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The dataset comprises raw data to validate methods for reliable data collection. We proposed the data collection methods in a path to assess digital healthcare apps. To validate the methods, we conducted experiments in Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk), and then we showed that the methods have a significant meaning based on statistical tests. The methods and tests are as follows: (1) comparison with the simplicity of protocol creation during the data preparation stage; (2) validation of data reliability weight compared with manually collected data during the data storage stage; and (3) the future reward distribution effect of observation during the data sharing stage. Each data set contains test information and raw data. The total number of participants was 718, and we excluded their worker ID, following by a policy by Amazon. All participants signed an informed consent document for the tests.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.011 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
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 it