MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1599613983 · doi:10.3138/cbmh.24.1.131

History of Geriatrics in Canada

2007· article· en· W1599613983 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
David B. Hogan

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Health History · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPrimary Care and Health Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeriatricsSpecialtyOpposition (politics)GerontologyMedicineFamily medicinePolitical scienceLawPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Specialization is a pervasive movement in medicine. How specialties develop is a complex phenomenon and does not depend solely on the growth of knowledge. The history of geriatrics in Canada is presented as an example of specialization in our country. The gestation period extended over decades. Practitioners moved from partial specialization to a full-time practice in the care of older patients. Opposition to the emerging specialty was mounted by established fields of practice. The choices made by the leaders of Canadian geriatrics molded the evolution of the specialty and have contributed to its precarious status at the present time.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.120
Threshold uncertainty score0.867

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.008
Science and technology studies0.0140.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.001

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.275 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations9
Published2007
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Health HistorySame topicPrimary Care and Health OutcomesFrench-language works237,207