Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Canadian Medical Association has appointed an oversight committee to review the content of the association's journal ( CMAJ ) and the work of its editor and to help in maintaining harmonious relations between the journal and the association. The association set up the committee after the journal published an editorial accusing Quebec physicians of having broken trust with the public when they failed to staff an emergency department at night, and a 51 year old heart attack victim who arrived six minutes after it closed died shortly afterwards ( CMAJ 2002;167:617). The editorial provoked a letter to the journal from the association's president, Dana Hanson, calling it an “unwarranted attack on the whole profession” and its conclusion “repugnant” ( CMAJ 2002;167:986). In the current issue of CMAJ , John Hoey, its editor, and Anne Marie …
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 | 0.043 | 0.165 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.021 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.020 | 0.022 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.028 | 0.013 |
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".