A Cross-Provincial Comparison of Health Care Reform in Canada: Building Blocks and Some Preliminary Results
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This special edition of the Review includes four papers that deal with health care reform in Canada in the 1990-2003 period. The papers are a small sample of some 30 case studies that have been prepared from an ongoing research project entitled Cross-Provincial Comparison of Health Care Reform in Canada (hereafter referred to as either the Cross-Provincial Project or the Project). Among other things, the 30 studies examine the nature and extent of health care reform that occurred during that period and the factors that help to explain why reform did, or did not, occur. The purpose of this introductory paper is three-fold: to provide the rationale and context for the Project; to describe the research methodology used; and to outline some preliminary results. In so doing, it is intended to provide some framework for the remainder of this special edition.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it