MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7098418460

Letters to the Editor

2016· article· en· W7098418460 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMagnolia and Illicium research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemisePremiseSuspectQuarter (Canadian coin)PreferenceHealth care
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Letters should be no longer than 300 words and preference will be given to letters responding to articles published in the JRSM. Our aim is to publish letters quickly. Not all correspondence will be acknowledged. DEMISE OF NURSING IN THE UK The demise of nursing in the United Kingdom: a warning for medicine A catchy title, but I wasn’t expecting the authors to show such astonishing lack of insight into the causes of this decline (JRSM 2007;100:70–74). Their main premise seems to be that what is wrong with UK nursing is that not everyone has a degree, and therefore nurses are unable to understand how to do their jobs! I can’t speak for others, but I suspect I am not alone in believing that it is exactly that switch from an ‘apprenticeship ’ form of training to the academic regimes we have now that has ruined UK nursing. Healthcare assistants

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.050
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: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.933
Threshold uncertainty score0.223

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.050
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0110.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0670.052

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.290 · 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
GenreEditorial

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMagnolia and Illicium researchFrench-language works237,207