Bibliographic record
Abstract
We start 2002 with a new-look Bulletin. The new design while being visually more attractive gives us more information to the printed page, faster production time, and cost savings we can channel into the work of ensuring the quality and accuracy of the information we print. Another improvement is that with the table of contents now all in one place on the outside back cover, it is easier to see at a glance what each issue is about. With the new design come updated guidelines for contributors (see pp. 85-86). We will now be following closely the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals (URMSBJ, available from http://www.icmje.org/index. html). These are commonly known as the Vancouver Guidelines, after the group of journal editors who met there in 1978 to draw up the first version. The resulting guidelines are now followed by several hundred biomedical journals throughout the world, thereby facilitating the work of authors in preparing their manuscripts. Changes have also been made to the online version of the journal (www.who.int/bulletin). An important development is the arrangement we have made with SciELO (Scientific Electronic Library Online, www.scielo. br), a project administered by the BIREME centre (www.bireme.br) of the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO). Originally conceived to provide free online access to leading Latin American journals, BIREME has now started to run thematic sites. The first of these sites is concerned with public health and the Bulletin is now hosted on it at http://www.scielosp. org/bwho where the full text and figures of Bulletin articles can be consulted in both PDF and HTML formats. SciELO is linked to MEDLINE/PubMed, so anyone searching those databases who retrieves an abstract or title of a Bulletin article can click on the Go to Publisher Site icon to obtain free access to the full text of the relevant article. We will be working further with SciELO to increase the Bulletin's visibility and distribution, and are in discussions with the US National Library of Medicine about including the Bulletin in the PubMed Central database. Another development is a CD-ROM containing the entire text of issues from the beginning of 1999 to the end of 2001. This is in the final stages of production and will be distributed early this year. It will be fully searchable, facilitating rapid retrieval of articles by means of any name or term in the text. In the same spirit we are installing a new manuscript tracking system which, when fully operational, will let authors submit manuscripts online. They will receive a password which will enable them to follow the progress of their manuscripts through the review and production processes. …
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 | 0.004 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.026 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.285 | 0.193 |
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".