MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2142777165 · doi:10.1136/jech-2013-202731

Glossary for the implementation of Health in All Policies (HiAP)

2013· article· en· W2142777165 on OpenAlexafffund
Alix Freiler, Carles Muntañer, Ketan Shankardass, Catherine L. Mah, Ágnes Molnár, Émilie Renahy, Patricia O’Campo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Epidemiology & Community Health · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicGlobal Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier UniversityPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
FundersPeterborough K. M. Hunter Charitable FoundationOntario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care
KeywordsGlossaryHealth policyPolitical sciencePublic healthPopulation healthGlobal healthVariety (cybernetics)Action (physics)PopulationEnvironmental healthPublic relationsMedicineComputer scienceNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Health in All Policies (HiAP) is becoming increasingly popular as a governmental strategy to improve population health by coordinating action across health and non-health sectors. A variety of intersectoral initiatives may be used in HiAP that frame health determinants as the bridge between policies and health outcomes. The purpose of this glossary is to present concepts and terms useful in understanding the implementation of HiAP as a cross-sectoral policy. The concepts presented here were applied and elaborated over the course of case studies of HiAP in multiple jurisdictions, which used key informant interviews and the systematic review of literature to study the implementation of specific HiAP initiatives.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.096
Threshold uncertainty score0.322

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0100.015
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.006
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0960.045

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 head0.189
GPT teacher head0.463
Teacher spread0.274 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations107
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Epidemiology & Community HealthSame topicGlobal Public Health Policies and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207