MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W169263634 · doi:10.3148/66.1.2005.43

<i>Individual and Household Food Insecurity in Canada:</i> Position of Dietitians of Canada: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (1)

2005· article· en· W169263634 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Elaine Power

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Dietetic Practice and Research · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFood Security and Health in Diverse Populations
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersHealth Canada
KeywordsFood securityPovertyPosition (finance)Food insecuritySafety netSocial securityBusinessEnvironmental healthPopulationPublic relationsMarketingEconomic growthPolitical scienceMedicineEconomicsAgricultureGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The position of Dietitians of Canada (DC) is that all Canadians must have food security. Recognizing food security as a social determinant of health, DC recommends a population health approach to food security: that is, an approach that seeks to reduce health inequities through the pursuit of social justice. A population health approach addresses the root cause of individual and household food insecurity – poverty – through improvements to the social safety net. DC strongly encourages dietitians to educate themselves about the issues and processes to achieve food security through social change, to use empowering strategies in community-based food programming, to conduct and apply research, and to participate in coalitions that advocate to create the conditions in which all Canadians can achieve food security.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.385

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.007
Science and technology studies0.0060.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.003

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 head0.214
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.212 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations80
Published2005
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Dietetic Practice and ResearchSame topicFood Security and Health in Diverse PopulationsFrench-language works237,207