MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2782762456

Human health in a modern world: can technology solve the mismatch?

2017· article· en· W2782762456 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer Science and Software Engineering · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicGlobal Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLife expectancyPandemicSAFERChinaDeveloping countryMedicineHealth careDiseaseGlobeChronic diseaseDeveloped countryGlobal healthPopulationDevelopment economicsEconomic growthEnvironmental healthIntensive care medicineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Computer sciencePolitical scienceComputer securityEconomicsPathology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

By many measures, human health is better now than at any time in history. The human population continues to increase and life expectancy is longer than ever (Dong, Milholland, & Vijg, 2016). Yet there is a problem. Much of these gains have been achieved by eliminating illness due to infection, making childbirth safer, and improving care and outcomes for chronic illnesses such as heart disease and cancer. Beneath these positive outcomes is a pandemic of chronic illnesses such as type 2 diabetes. These chronic illnesses are spreading across the globe from western countries to rapidly developing countries such as China and India (Collaborators, 2017).

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 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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.616
Threshold uncertainty score0.797

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.260 · 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