MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6958256464 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.26991553

Additional file 5 of Screening for hypertension in adults: protocol for evidence reviews to inform a Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care guideline update

2024· article· en· W6958256464 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealth Promotion and Cardiovascular Prevention
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUniversity of OttawaMcGill UniversityPublic Health Agency of CanadaKingston Health Sciences CentreQueen's UniversityDalhousie UniversityWestern UniversityUniversity of TorontoMemorial University of NewfoundlandChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioJewish General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProtocol (science)Task forceGuidelineHealth carePreventive careTask (project management)Evidence-based practiceEvidence-based medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Additional file 5. PRESS checklist.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.511
Threshold uncertainty score0.802

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.5110.000

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicHealth Promotion and Cardiovascular PreventionFrench-language works237,207