MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1499718036 · doi:10.3138/cbmh.20.1.7

Some Introductory Observations

2003· article· en· W1499718036 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
John C. Burnham

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Health History · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHistorical Psychiatry and Medical Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubject (documents)Subject matterMinor (academic)Public healthHealth carePsychologyHistoryMedicineSociologyPolitical scienceLawNursingLibrary scienceComputer scienceCurriculum

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is possible that some readers might find “minor vices” or “bad habits” somewhat startling subject matter for a medical history journal. As the papers that follow will show, the subject does have direct links to the history of medicine and health. Beyond some fairly obvious connections to public health by way of alcoholism and sexually transmitted diseases, the efforts of people in the past to deal with moral transgressions, as these authors will point out, often involved personnel and ideas from the health care sectors in Canada and elsewhere.

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)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.095
Threshold uncertainty score0.319

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0950.027

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations3
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Health HistorySame topicHistorical Psychiatry and Medical PracticesFrench-language works237,207