Bibliographic record
Abstract
Editor's choice Cataclysm and departure You ought to have a theme issue on "America as a global threat to health" suggested one of our correspondents, perhaps facetiously.Imagining the downcast face of our North American editor, the plummeting circulation of BMJUSA, and the wagging finger and circumlocutions of Donald Rumsfeld, we promptly decided against.But this issue could have provided the beginnings for such a theme.A serious response to global warming needed American leadership.Instead, we got the opposite.The United States, which produces a quarter of the world's greenhouse gases, turned its back on the Kyoto agreement.As a result we are not responding adequately to global warming, and our grandchildren will find themselves in an increasingly degraded world.Now the American creativity and flair, which most of us admire, has produced not a solution to the problem but a film to scare us witless.Our cover picture, taken from the film The Day After Tomorrow, shows New York under water.Global warming is causing disasters.New Delhi is snow covered, and Britain is in the grip of an ice age because the Gulf Stream has switched off.Shakoor Hajat writes that the film presents "the worst case scenario" (p 1323), but Jonathan Patz tells us that global warming means not just a gradual climb in temperature but also an increased frequency and intensity of extreme climatic events-heat waves, droughts, floods, and storms (p 1269).It is also likely to increase the number of hungry people by 90 million this century (p 1324).Peter Drahos and David Henry are upset by the United States because it is using its trade powers to undermine rational drug policies in Australia (p 1271).The Australians have a tough policy on subsidising only drugs that are cost effective, but a new trade agreement creates a body to dispute decisions of the committee that decides on subsidies.This agreement, argue the editorialists, is one of several that is diluting the Doha declaration of the World Trade Organisation that aimed "to protect public health and, in particular, to promote access to medicines for all."Before I'm accused of being "anti-American" I must tell you that I will be leaving the BMJ to become chief executive of a European company being created by the UnitedHealth Group, the largest health and wellbeing company in the United States, to work with European public health systems, including the NHS (p 1276).The company will be aiming to help speed modernisation of the NHS.My main reason for leaving is that a quarter of a century is enough.I've had a wonderful time, and, like Woody Allen sweeping the floors in a strip club, I would have paid for the privilege of editing the BMJ.I hope that I hand the journal on in as a good a shape as I found it, and I thank the BMJ staff, authors, and readers for tolerating my eccentricities for so long.(PS.I'm not going just yet.)
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 | 0.013 | 0.045 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.025 | 0.032 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.023 | 0.025 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.014 |
| Research integrity | 0.013 | 0.043 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.035 | 0.011 |
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".