MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Additional file 2 of Association between anticholinergic activity and xerostomia and/ or xerophthalmia in the elderly: systematic review

2024· article· en· W6920977572 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSalivary Gland Disorders and Functions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsXerophthalmiaCohortAnticholinergicRandomized controlled trialQuality assessmentCohort studyAssociation (psychology)Quality (philosophy)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Additional file 2: Appendix 2. Quality assessment of included studies (JBI Critical Appraisal tool for Cross-sectional studies, Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale for cohort and case-control studies, Rob 2.0 tool for randomized trials).

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.055
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.799
Threshold uncertainty score0.287

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.055
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.004
Bibliometrics0.0070.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.7990.033

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.257 · 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.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicSalivary Gland Disorders and FunctionsFrench-language works237,207