MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1594876945 · doi:10.1177/10253823050120030127x

Reflections on the challenges of health programmes

2005· article· en· W1594876945 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
William Dab

Bibliographic record

VenuePromotion & Education · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Systems and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic healthEnvironmental healthMedicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

having participated in this closing ceremony are as highly regarded as the joy of rediscovering Quebec and its dynamism. This conference has been exceptionally rich in content and I propose we share some of its findings. This wealth makes my closing remarks a little challenging. No significant dimension has been forgotten to which I could have given new impetus, and it is not my role today to propose a synthesis to you. Neither will I be satisfied with a speech in which I present you with French public health policy.

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)0.028
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.042
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: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.228
Threshold uncertainty score0.454

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0280.042
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0160.022
Scholarly communication0.0200.009
Open science0.0040.011
Research integrity0.0260.028
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.002

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 head0.436
GPT teacher head0.600
Teacher spread0.164 · 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

Citations7
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePromotion & EducationSame topicHealthcare Systems and PracticesFrench-language works237,207