MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Confounding Effect in Clinical Research of Otolaryngology and Its Control

2015· review· en· W830718730 on OpenAlexaff
Yongqiang Yu, Dongyan Huang, Susan Armijo Olivo, Huaian Yang, Yagesh Bambanini, Lyn K. Sonnenberg, Brenda Clark, Gabriela Constantinescu, Jason Qian Yu, Ming Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueChinese Medical Sciences Journal · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDelphi Technique in Research
Canadian institutionsGlenrose Rehabilitation HospitalUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConfoundingMedicineOtorhinolaryngologyResearch designSet (abstract data type)StatisticsSurgeryInternal medicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Confounding effect is a critical issue in clinical research of otolaryngology because it can distort the research's conclusion. In this review, we introduce the definition of confounding effect, the methods of verifying and controlling the effect. Confounding effect can be prevented by research's design, and adjusted by data analysis. Clinicians would be aware and cautious about confounding effect in their research. They would be able to set up a research's design in which appropriate methods have been applied to prevent this effect.They would know how to adjust confounding effect after data collection. It is important to remember that sometimes it is impossible to eliminate confounding effect completely, and statistical method is not a master key. Solid research knowledge and critical thinking of our brain are the most important in controlling confounding effect.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.237
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.101
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.981
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2370.101
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.008
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.000
Research integrity0.0010.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.466
GPT teacher head0.672
Teacher spread0.206 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designOther design
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChinese Medical Sciences JournalSame topicDelphi Technique in ResearchFrench-language works237,207