MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6964269833 · doi:10.25384/sage.12652172

Appendix_C_May26-2020_online_supp – Supplemental material for 20th Anniversary Update of the Ottawa Decision Support Framework Part I: A Systematic Review of the Decisional Needs of People Making Health or Social Decisions

2020· article· en· W6964269833 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueSage Journals Data · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and biodiversity studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedical decision makingDecision support systemClinical decision makingSocial supportMaking-ofR-CASTSystematic review

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Supplemental material, Appendix_C_May26-2020_online_supp for 20th Anniversary Update of the Ottawa Decision Support Framework Part I: A Systematic Review of the Decisional Needs of People Making Health or Social Decisions by Lauren Hoefel, Annette M. O’Connor, Krystina B. Lewis, Laura Boland, Lindsey Sikora, Jiale Hu and Dawn Stacey in Medical Decision Making

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.199
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: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.794
Threshold uncertainty score0.294

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.199
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.003
Bibliometrics0.0170.018
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0070.007
Open science0.0050.006
Research integrity0.0070.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.7940.340

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSage Journals DataSame topicEcology and biodiversity studiesFrench-language works237,207