MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2040287186 · doi:10.3747/co.19.1019

Accelerating Knowledge to Action: The Pan-Canadian Cancer Control Strategy

2012· article· en· W2040287186 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Lee Fairclough, Jon R. Hill, Heather Bryant, L. Kitchen–Clarke

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Cancer Incidence and Screening
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryCanadian Partnership Against Cancer
FundersPartenariat Canadien Contre Le CancerAustralian Government
KeywordsGeneral partnershipMandateGovernment (linguistics)CorporationPublic relationsBusinessMedicineKnowledge managementPublic administrationPolitical scienceComputer scienceFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In 2006, the federal government committed funding of $250 million over 5 years for the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer Corporation to begin implementation of the Canadian Strategy for Cancer Control (CSCC). The Partnership was established as a not-for-profit corporation designed to work actively with a broad range of stakeholders and organizations that had been engaged in the development of the CSCC and with the public more broadly. A policy experiment unto itself, the Partnership was the first disease-based organization funded at the federal level outside of government. It was charged with a mandate to enable transfer of knowledge and to catalyze coordinated and accelerated action across the country to reduce the burden of cancer. IMPLEMENTATION: Implementation has involved establishing shared goals, objectives, and plans with participating partners. Knowledge management-incorporating pan-Canadian approaches to the identification of content, processes, technology, and culture change-was used to enable that work across the federated health care delivery system. Evaluation of the organization through independent review, the ability to achieve initiative-level targets by 2012, and progress measured using indicators of system performance was used to examine the effectiveness of the strategy and approach overall. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Evaluation findings support the conclusions that Canada has made progress in achieving immediate outcomes (achievable in <5 years) associated with advancing its cancer control goals and that there is evidence that, with sustained effort, those goals will translate into a long-term (>25 years) impact on cancer. The mechanism of funding the Partnership to develop collaboration among stakeholders in cancer control to achieve coordinated action has been possible and has been enabled through the Partnership's knowledge-to-action mandate. Opportunities are available to further engage and clarify the roles of stakeholders in action, to clearly define outcomes, and to further quantify the economic benefits that have resulted from a coordinated approach. With the ongoing funding commitment to support coordinated action within a federated environment of health care delivery, there is opportunity to reduce the impact that cancer may have in the long term in Canada.

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)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
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 score0.793
Threshold uncertainty score0.920

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0140.007
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0050.011
Research integrity0.0050.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.515
GPT teacher head0.531
Teacher spread0.015 · 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

Citations5
Published2012
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent OncologySame topicGlobal Cancer Incidence and ScreeningFrench-language works237,207