MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6927175633 · doi:10.3205/18ebm045

Absolute Effekte auf der Basis von gepoolten Hazard ratios: eine Analyse von mehr als 500 systematischen Übersichtsarbeiten im Krebsbereich

2018· article· de· W6927175633 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGerman Medical Science (German Research Foundation) · 2018
Typearticle
Languagede
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Causal Inference Techniques
Canadian institutionsCochrane
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHazardIntervention (counseling)Hazard ratio

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hintergrund: Überlebenszeitanalysen werden verwendet, um die Dauer der Zeit bis zu einem bestimmten Ereignis zu beschreiben, die abgeleiteten Effekte als Hazard Ratios (HR) dargestellt. Der „Methodological Expectations of Cochrane Intervention Reviews (MECIR)“-Leitfaden von Cochrane[zum vollständigen Text gelangen Sie über die oben angegebene URL]

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 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)0.035
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Open science, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.486
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0350.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.007
Science and technology studies0.0040.013
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0050.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.016

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 head0.147
GPT teacher head0.498
Teacher spread0.351 · 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