Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Food and Drugs Act theoretically gives Health Canada considerable authority in dealing with safety issues but there are also significant limitations in the legislation. Furthermore, the priorities of Health Canada are skewed in favour of rapid approval of new drugs at the expense of the postmarketing pharmacosurveillance system as judged by how much money and many personnel are allocated to each activity. Health Canada has explicitly rejected developing quantitative standards for evaluating its postmarketing pharmacosurveillance system. In addition to lacking standards in this area, it does not monitor whether or not its communications to professionals and the public have had the desired effect in terms of changing the way that drugs are prescribed and used. Health Canada continues to treat safety information that companies submit as confidential business information. What safety information it does release is insufficient to allow an adequate independent assessment of a drug’s safety. Progressive licensing is a new regulatory model that would allow Health Canada to retain control over a drug throughout the product's entire lifecycle. In its initial incarnation progressive licensing would have actually further strengthened Health Canada’s reliance on the industry for information and would have worked to enhance regulatory secrecy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".