MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2379034570 · doi:10.18192/uojm.v6i1.1597

Taking On Tobacco: A Discussion with Dr. Andrew Pipe About His Career and The Ottawa Model for Smoking Cessation

2016· article· en· W2379034570 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Devon L. Johnstone, Matthew W Loranger

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Ottawa Journal of Medicine · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Effects of Exercise
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineQueen (butterfly)HabilitationSmoking cessationGerontologyFamily medicineHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dr. Andrew Pipe is chief of the division of Prevention and Rehabilitation at the University of Ottawa Heart Institute and Professor in the Faculty of Medicine at the University of Ottawa. He completed his medical training at Queen’s University, and interned at The Ottawa Hospital, beginning a career path which combined his interests in sports medicine, health promotion, and advocacy. He has been a physician for athletes at the international level, served on several sporting and anti-doping organizations, and is recognized as a leading expert on cardiovascular disease prevention, physical activity, and smoking cessation. Dr Andrew Pipe est professeur à la Faculté de médecine à l’Université d’Ottawa et il est également responsable de la division de prévention et de réhabilitation à l’Institut de cardiologie de l’Université d’Ottawa. Dr Pipe a terminé son éducation à l’Université de Queen’s et son entrainement à l’Hôpital d’Ottawa où il a commencé sa carrière dans un domaine incluant la médecine sportive, la promotion de la santé et la défense des droits. Il a été médecin pour les athlètes au niveau international et il est reconnu comme un expert sur la prévention de maladies cardiovasculaires, sur l’activité physique, et sur la cessation du tabagisme.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.756
Threshold uncertainty score0.243

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Ottawa Journal of MedicineSame topicCardiovascular Effects of ExerciseFrench-language works237,207