MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Detailed description of risk of bias assessment using Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS).

2020· dataset· en· W6923151315 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2020
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPublic Administration and Political Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScale (ratio)Risk assessmentMeasure (data warehouse)Noise (video)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OpenAlex records an abstract for this work, but it could not be fetched just now.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.159
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score0.881

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.159
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.006
Bibliometrics0.0070.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.3820.058

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 head0.189
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 designNot applicable
DomainMethods
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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicPublic Administration and Political AnalysisFrench-language works237,207