Health status of prisoners in Canada: Narrative review.
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To review the literature for quantitative research on the health status of persons in custody in provincial, territorial, and federal correctional facilities in Canada, and summarize recent evidence. QUALITY OF EVIDENCE: A search was performed in research databases and the websites of relevant Canadian governmental and non-governmental organizations for quantitative studies of health conducted between 1993 and 2014. Studies were included that provided quantitative data on health status for youth or adults who had been detained or incarcerated in a jail or prison in Canada. MAIN MESSAGE: The health status of this population is poor compared with the general Canadian population, as indicated by data on social determinants of health, mortality in custody, mental health, substance use, communicable diseases, and sexual and reproductive health. Little is known about mortality after release, chronic diseases, injury, reproductive health, and health care access and quality. CONCLUSION: Health status data should be used to improve health care and to intervene to improve health for persons while in custody and after release, with potential benefits for all Canadians.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it