Additional file 4 of Changes in concentrations of cervicovaginal immune mediators across the menstrual cycle: a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Additional file 4. Concentration and forest plots for each individual immune mediator. Concentration plots - Each symbol shows the concentration of the indicated immune mediator in a single sample. Each study is plotted separately. Lines connect samples from the same participant; in some cases participants provided multiple samples in the same phase, in which case multiple symbols within the same phase may be connected. Pale grey symbols are below the lower limit of detection and are assigned the value of half the lower limit of detection. Forest plots - Each row represents a different study, with the vertical line at the middle of each square indicating the mean and the horizontal line indicating the 95% confidence interval. Positive numbers indicate higher concentrations during the luteal phase (compared to the follicular phase), while negative numbers indicate lower concentrations during the luteal phase (compared to the follicular phase). The size of the squares is proportional to how heavily the study is weighted in the meta-analysis. The center of the diamond and the vertical dotted line indicates the meta-effect as determined by the random effects model. The width of the diamond indicates the 95% confidence interval of the meta-effect. A narrow diamond indicates small confidence intervals, a wide diamond indicates large confidence intervals. TE, treatment effect (log2-pg/mL of the luteal phase minus log2-pg/mL of the follicular phase); seTE, standard error of the treatment effect; 95%-CI, 95% confidence interval around the treatment effect; Weight, the percentage of the meta-estimate contributed by each study.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.046 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.725 | 0.022 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".