MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1968458394 · doi:10.1136/bmj.g4231

Canadian health ministry is given new powers to tighten drug safety

2014· article· en· W1968458394 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
O. Dyer

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMedical Malpractice and Liability Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParliamentChristian ministryFood and drug administrationGovernment (linguistics)BusinessHouse of CommonsCommonsPublic administrationLawPolitical scienceRisk analysis (engineering)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada’s House of Commons has granted the health ministry sweeping new powers to remove drugs from the market and punish manufacturers who sell dangerous drugs or withhold information on adverse effects. Until now, the Canadian government has relied on voluntary agreements with manufacturers to remove dangerous medicines from the market, a system that broke down most notoriously in 1962 when a special act of parliament was needed to remove thalidomide from the Canadian market long after the US Food and Drug Administration had refused approval and European nations had banned the drug. …

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.040
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.921
Threshold uncertainty score0.573

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.040
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0210.008
Scholarly communication0.0100.004
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0180.016
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0400.006

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.398 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJSame topicMedical Malpractice and Liability IssuesFrench-language works237,207