MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2160206839 · doi:10.12927/hcpap..16920

Maz Confusion? Reflections on A Framework for Reform

2002· article· en· W2160206839 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Raisa Deber

Bibliographic record

VenueA Nudge Too Far? A Nudge at All? On Paying People to Be Healthy · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Services Management and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConfusionRhetoricHealth reformPolitical sciencePopulationPublic relationsPublic administrationMedicinePsychologyHealth policyHealth careEnvironmental healthLawPsychoanalysisPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Review of new models in Healthcare. Bridging the gap between the world of academia and the world of healthcare management and policy. Authors explore the potential of new ideas. Edited by Audrey Laporte, MA, PhD, Director, Institute for Health Policy Measurement and Evaluation, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON and Arjumand Siddiqi, MPH, ScD, Professor, Division Head of Epidemiology, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, Canada Research Chair in, Population Health Equity, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.128
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.010

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 head0.272
GPT teacher head0.502
Teacher spread0.230 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueA Nudge Too Far? A Nudge at All? On Paying People to Be HealthySame topicHealth Services Management and PolicyFrench-language works237,207