MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6939514509 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.5739288

Additional file 1: of Is meat consumption associated with depression? A meta-analysis of observational studies

2017· article· en· W6939514509 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutritional Studies and Diet
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTable (database)Observational studyScale (ratio)Quality (philosophy)Consumption (sociology)Cohort

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Table S1. The methodological quality of cross-sectional studies in accordance with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Table S2. The methodological quality of cohort studies in accordance with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Table S3. The methodological quality of case-control studies in accordance with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). (DOCX 26 kb)

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.125
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: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.823
Threshold uncertainty score0.253

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.125
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.006
Bibliometrics0.0060.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.8230.042

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 head0.444
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.051 · 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 designMeta-analysis
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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshare→Same topicNutritional Studies and Diet→French-language works237,207→