Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dear Clinical and Investigative Medicine (CIM) readers, I write this message to solicit your help in making the Canadian Society for Clinical Investigation a vital society for medicine in Canada and to inform CIM readers about the CSCI. The CSCI plays an important role in maintaining the sustainability of our health care system. The only way to improve health care for Canadians is to continually optimize our methods of treatment and to gain a better understanding of the illnesses that face our population. Systematic research in all facets of healthcare, be it the molecular mechanisms of disease, the efficacy of treatment alternatives or the functioning of the health care system is the only way to guarantee a better system for the next generation of Canadians. As the only Society in Canada with a dedicated focus on the profession of clinician-researchers and our young clinician-investigator trainees, we provide crucial support for the enterprise of clinical investigation in Canada. The CSCI’s mandate is to promote clinical and basic research in the field of human health throughout Canada, to lobby for adequate research funding at the federal, regional and local levels, and to support Canadian researchers in their endeavours and at all stages of their careers. The CSCI organizes an annual meeting that highlights research work by its members and guest lecturers that speak with authority on issues that face Clinician-Investigators in Canada. CSCI is currently in the midst of a reorganization that started several years ago and has resulted in the establishment of an independent meeting, a renewed Young Investigators Forum and establishing close ties with the Clinician Investigator Trainee Association of Canada (CITAC). Reinforcing our efforts to revitalize our organization, we recently hired a new organization, Gallaher Membership Services and together we are streamlining our Society’s operations. The new CSCI website address is www.csci-scrc.ca. The website contains vital information about the CSCI, CIM and information about becoming a member of the CSCI. Our Society’s journal, Clinical and Investigative Medicine (CIM), has also undergone a transformation and is under the leadership of Dr. Jonathan Angel of Ottawa. We are proud of the changes that have occurred at CIM and look forward to the continued success of this journal. I sincerely hope that all Clinician-Investigators in Canada, irrespective of their stage of training or career, will adopt the changes that have been made and those that will continue to be made at CSCI by joining CSCI and participating in strengthening the voice for Clinical-Investigation in Canada. Joining CSCI allows members to publish in CIM at no charge. This is a tremendous value for our members. Communication with CSCI members will continue through CIM where we will give updates announcing further developments at the CSCI. I welcome any feedback or suggestions and hope that you enjoy reading CIM as much as I do. Sincerely, Brent W. Winston, MD, FRCPC, FACP, FCCM President, CSCI
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.050 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.033 | 0.037 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.075 | 0.055 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".