MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6945451030 · doi:10.25384/sage.12452972.v1

MEDLINE_Search_06042016 – Supplemental material for PRISMA guideline compliance is imperative for systematic review appraisal

2020· article· en· W6945451030 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBiological and pharmacological studies of plants
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGuidelineCompliance (psychology)Systematic reviewCritical appraisalMEDLINEConformity assessment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Supplemental material, MEDLINE_Search_06042016 for PRISMA guideline compliance is imperative for systematic review appraisal by Sandra McKeown in Canadian Journal of Kidney Health and Disease

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)0.072
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.312
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Reporting · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.928
Threshold uncertainty score0.650

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0720.312
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0140.011
Bibliometrics0.0280.026
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0150.010
Open science0.0060.010
Research integrity0.0110.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.5440.136

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 head0.220
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.228 · 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
DomainReporting
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 topicBiological and pharmacological studies of plantsFrench-language works237,207