MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6958130290 · doi:10.60692/znhsz-e6531

Placebo use in vaccine trials: Recommendations of a WHO expert panel

2014· article· en· W6958130290 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueGreater South Information System · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEgo Development and Educational Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersMedical Research Council
KeywordsPsychological interventionPlaceboClinical trialPublic healthVaccine efficacyDeveloping countryVaccination

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)0.436
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.422
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.436
Threshold uncertainty score0.696

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.4360.422
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.015
Bibliometrics0.0100.013
Science and technology studies0.0040.009
Scholarly communication0.0110.010
Open science0.0180.006
Research integrity0.0460.025
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.009

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 head0.243
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.113 · 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
Domainnot available
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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGreater South Information System→Same topicEgo Development and Educational Practices→French-language works237,207→