Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Canadian Coordinating Office for Health Technology Assessment (CCOHTA) was established by the Federal, Provincial, and Territorial Ministers of Health in 1989 for a 3-year trial period. In 1993 CCOHTA was made a permanent organization and in 1999 the Deputy Ministers of Health renewed CCOHTA's mandate and increased its funding. CCOHTA's role is to coordinate health technology assessment (HTA) priorities across jurisdictions, foster and undertake assessment activity, and function as a clearinghouse for technology assessment results while increasing healthcare system stakeholder awareness of HTA findings. The coordinated and collaborated approach adopted by CCOHTA minimizes duplication with other national and provincial organizations and contributes to the ability of the Canadian healthcare system to continue to deliver high-quality health care to its constituents.
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 | 0.009 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.029 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.026 | 0.001 |
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".