MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2107568324 · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(08)61659-1

Sustainability science: an integrated approach for health-programme planning

2008· review· en· W2107568324 on OpenAlexaff
Russell L. Gruen, Julian Elliott, Monica Nolan, Paul Lawton, Anne Parkhill, Cameron McLaren, John N. Lavis

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicChild Nutrition and Water Access
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersMedical Research Council
KeywordsSustainabilityContext (archaeology)Sustainability scienceKey (lock)Sustainable developmentBusinessManagement scienceProcess managementSustainability organizationsEnvironmental planningPolitical scienceEnvironmental resource managementComputer scienceEconomicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.012
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0070.007
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0040.004
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 head0.149
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.284 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations402
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueThe LancetSame topicChild Nutrition and Water AccessFrench-language works237,207