MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1964969844 · doi:10.12968/bjhc.2015.21.4.198

The bitter divide over the private sector

2015· article· en· W1964969844 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nick Timmins

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Healthcare Management · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Services Management and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrivate sectorGovernment (linguistics)Health sectorGeneral electionPublic administrationBusinessPolitical scienceMedicineHealth servicesLawPoliticsPhilosophyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the general election approaches, Nick Timmins, senior fellow at the Institute for Government and the King's Fund looks at views of the private sector in health

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.083

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0120.018
Scholarly communication0.0230.021
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0160.026
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.003

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.331 · 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of Healthcare ManagementSame topicHealth Services Management and PolicyFrench-language works237,207