MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7051982992

Rapid synthesis: Strategies to improve health outcomes and care experiences for black women with cancer

2023· other· en· W7051982992 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectrostatic Discharge in Electronics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCancerBlack womenHealth careMEDLINEPublic healthCancer screeningGlobal healthHealth equityEvidence-based practiceQualitative research
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An in-depth synthesis of what is known based on the best available global research evidence (i.e., evidence syntheses) and local research evidence (i.e., single studies) and may include a scan of experiences from other countries and from Canadian provinces and territories, about strategies to improve health outcomes and care experiences for black women with cancer in response to a decision-maker's request.

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)0.108
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.294
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.143
Threshold uncertainty score0.570

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1080.294
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.007
Bibliometrics0.0170.014
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0100.007
Open science0.0040.009
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1430.020

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.255 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectrostatic Discharge in ElectronicsFrench-language works237,207