MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7044845891

复方口服避孕药治疗原发性痛经的系统评价

2012· other· zh· W7044845891 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueLanzhou University Institutional Repository · 2012
Typeother
Languagezh
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProcess (computing)Identification (biology)Product (mathematics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

目的:复方口服避孕药(COC)治疗原发性痛经是否有效尚缺乏大样本高质量的临床研究证实,本研究旨在通过循证医学方法评价COC治疗原发性痛经的安全性及有效性。方法:计算机检索Medline、EMbase、Cochrane Library、中国生物医学文献数据库、中国期刊全文数据库、中文科技期刊全文数据库,检索时间从各数据库建立至2011年7月;同时辅助其他检索方法,所检索文献由两名系统评价者独立评价纳入研究并提取资料,并用RevMan5.1软件进行统计学分析。结果:共纳入8项研究,Meta分析结果显示:与安慰剂组相比,COC组可以降低患者McGill疼痛问卷(MDQ)评分(MD=2.7,95%CI...

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)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.110
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.158

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.110
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0090.010
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0110.010
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.233 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLanzhou University Institutional RepositorySame topicMedical Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207