MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2095232924 · doi:10.1071/py05035

Guest Editorial: Indicators and Public Health Policy

2005· editorial· en· W2095232924 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Journal of Primary Health · 2005
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPrimary Care and Health Outcomes
Canadian institutionsPublic Health Agency of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic healthPopulation healthHealth economicsBureaucracyHealth careWork (physics)Government (linguistics)Health policyPublic relationsPublic sectorCommunity healthQuality (philosophy)Health services researchMedicinePublic policySet (abstract data type)Public administrationNursingPolitical scienceEconomic growthComputer scienceEconomicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This issue includes a paper from the Victorian Department of Human Services, Australia, addressing applications of data on ambulatory care sensitive condition hospitalisations. This work has been very important for Victoria as it provides robust new indicators of access and quality of primary care services that have direct application to current public health policy. On the surface, this work appears to be the result of a simple set of analyses of routine hospitalisations data; commonplace data that are usually presented in bureaucratic reports that have a life gathering dust on the desks of public sector health administrators. How could such data excite anybody or provoke a practical policy or strategic response?

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.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.206
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0030.012
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.446
Teacher spread0.390 · 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