MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2752970172 · doi:10.14288/1.0340088

Médicaments indispensables : Les recommandations du groupe consultatif de citoyens sur l'assurance-médicaments publique au Canada : Rapport final

2017· article· fr· W2752970172 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Groupe consultatif de citoyens sur l'assurance-médicaments publique au Canada

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2017
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

"Nous sommes un groupe de 35 bénévoles choisis de manière aléatoire provenant des différents provinces et territoires du Canada. Nous nous sommes réunis afin d’apprendre le fonctionnement de l’assurance des médicaments d’ordonnance au Canada et pour recommander des changements qui bénéficieront aux Canadiens... "

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)0.039
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.109
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.962
Threshold uncertainty score0.279

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0390.109
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.007
Science and technology studies0.0060.004
Scholarly communication0.0080.002
Open science0.0050.004
Research integrity0.0090.006
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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.167 · 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)→Same topicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life→French-language works237,207→