MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Additional file 1 of Infant feeding mode predicts the costs of healthcare services in one region of Canada: a data linkage pilot study

2020· article· en· W6958136184 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBreastfeeding Practices and Influences
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTable (database)Health careLinkage (software)FlowchartMode (computer interface)Norwegian

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Additional file 1: Figure S1. Flowchart of participant requirement process. Table S1. Healthcare Provider Visits by Infant Feeding Mode (Frequency, n (%)). Table S2. Number of Unique Visits to Healthcare Providers and the Associated Costs by IFM (Counts). Table S3. Description of Hospitalizations During The First Year of Life. Table S4. Mean (SD), Median (IQR), Min & Max of the Total Costs Associated with each Healthcare Provider, By Infant Feeding Mode.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.507
Threshold uncertainty score0.704

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.007
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.5070.026

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 head0.136
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.173 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshare→Same topicBreastfeeding Practices and Influences→French-language works237,207→