MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6949777808 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.1434779

Exposé (E + F + F Canada) Summarizing Problems Met With Cochrane In The Case Of The Hpv Vaccine Review – March 2015

2015· article· en· W6949777808 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of WaterlooUniversité LavalUniversité de MontréalConcordia UniversityMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransparency (behavior)HPV vaccinesMEDLINECochrane collaborationVaccination

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This exposé describes background and process of the Cochrane HPV vaccines review and express our concerns on lack of transparency and reluctance to publish critical comments as we experienced them with Cochrane. This text was sent in March 2015 to several journalists; it was not published.

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)0.028
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.186
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Evaluation · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.991
Threshold uncertainty score0.739

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0280.186
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.0110.012
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0090.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2210.051

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.246 · 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
DomainEvaluation
GenreCommentary

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
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)→Same topicCervical Cancer and HPV Research→French-language works237,207→