MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A cancer control strategy and deliberative federalism: Modernizing health care and democratizing intergovernmental relations

2006· article· en· W2010703108 on OpenAlexaffabout
Michael J. Prince

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Public Administration · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Systems and Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFederalismCooperative federalismPolitical sciencePublic administrationHumanitiesGeneral partnershipLawArtPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: This article describes the nature of, and the need for, a national strategy on cancer control. It then considers the implications of such a strategy for the working models of Canadian federalism. The ideas, structure, and process of developing the Canadian Strategy for Cancer Control involves a new model for the conduct of intergovernmental and inter‐sectoral relations, an approach we can call deliberative federalism. In this model, interest groups, professional associations, and other social actors are part of the modern state alongside cabinet parliamentary government and federalism. As a multiple partnership arrangement, the Strategy is a platform for communication between governments, non‐governmental agencies, health professionals, and cancer survivors and families. Adopting a strategy for cancer control is thus an opportunity to modernize the management of chronic diseases and to further democratize the conduct of intergovernmental relations. Sommaire: Le présent article décrit la nature et le besoin d'une stratégie nationale pour la lutte contre le cancer. Il examine ensuite les implications d'une telle stratégie pour les modèles de travail du fédéralisme canadien. Les idées, la structure et le processus concernant l'élaboration de la Stratégie canadienne de lutte contre le cancer impliquent un nouveau modèle pour les relations intergouvernementales et intersectorielles, une approche que nous pouvons nommer fédéralisme délibératif. Dans ce modèle, les groupes d'intérêts, les associations professionnelles et autres acteurs sociaux font partie de l'État moderne, aux côtés du gouvernement parlementaire et du fédéralisme. En tant que contrat de partenariat multiple, la Stratégie est une plate‐forme pour la communication entre les gouvernements, les organismes non gouvernementaux, les professíonnels de la santé et les survivants du cancer et leurs familles. L'adoption d'une stratégie de lutte contre le cancer est donc une occasion de moderniser la gestion des maladies chroniques et de démocratiser davantage les relations intergouvernementales.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.969
Threshold uncertainty score0.872

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations4
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Public AdministrationSame topicPolitical Systems and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207