MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7136041000 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.4788301

Additional file 5: of An evaluation of the comparative effectiveness of geriatrician-led comprehensive geriatric assessment for improving patient and healthcare system outcomes for older adults: a protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis

2017· article· W7136041000 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Charlene Soobiah, Caitlin Daly, Erik Blondal, Joycelyne Ewusie, Joanne Ho, Meghan Elliott, Rossini Ying Kwan Yue, Jayna Holroyd-Leduc, Barbara Liu, Sharon Marr, Jenny Basran, Andrea Tricco, Jemila S. Hamid, Sharon Straus

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2017
Typearticle
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProtocol (science)AuthorizationHealth careHealthcare systemSystematic reviewMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Authorization for funding. Funding agreement with the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) and the Strategy for Patient Oriented Research (SPOR). (PDF 45 kb)

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.094
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: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.664
Threshold uncertainty score0.479

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.094
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.010
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.6640.019

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 head0.114
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.299 · 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
GenreProtocol

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshare→Same topicFrailty in Older Adults→French-language works237,207→