MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6977122827 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.12838745

Additional file 1 of Parental acceptance of silver Diamine fluoride application on primary dentition: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020· article· en· W6977122827 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Health and Care Utilization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTable (database)Quality (philosophy)Quality assessmentClinical trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Additional file 1: Supplementary Table S1. Definitions of “parental acceptance” and scales reported by each included study. Supplementary Table S2. Evaluation of included case-control and cross-sectional studies content according to STROBE (2007) checklist. Supplementary Table S3. Evaluation of the included clinical trials content according to CONSORT (2010) Check list. Supplementary Table S4. Quality assessment according to Oxford Quality Scoring System for clinical trial studies. Supplementary Table S5. Quality assessment according to Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Form for Case-Control Studies.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.067
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.846
Threshold uncertainty score0.220

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.067
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.0050.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.8460.043

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.246 · 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
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshare→Same topicDental Health and Care Utilization→French-language works237,207→