Bibliographic record
Abstract
Health Canada is looking to modernize its approach to regulating self-care products. These are everyday products available for purchase without a prescription and include cosmetics, natural health products and non-prescription drugs. The goals of this regulatory modernization are to align the levels of oversight with risk to the consumer, and to help consumers make better informed decisions. While many self-care products are low risk, the regulatory oversight for each category is very different, including requirements for product labelling. To ensure that the new approach is informed by a broad range of perspectives, Health Canada has consulted extensively with Canadians, including consumer groups, academia, health professionals and industry. Health Canada is taking a phased approach, with plans to introduce key regulatory changes over the next two years. First, in the fall of 2018, Health Canada will introduce targeted amendments to the Natural Health Products Regulations to improve labelling of natural health products, including a facts table. These changes are intended to better support consumers in selecting and safely using a product. Second, in early 2019, Health Canada will introduce targeted amendments to the Food and Drug Regulations to align regulatory oversight of non-prescription drugs with the risk of the product, including the creation of expedited pathways for lower-risk products. The goal is to focus oversight where it will most benefit Canadians, based on evidence and the risk of the product. While these first two projects are underway, Health Canada will continue to develop plans for further improvements to how self-care products are regulated, which will follow over the coming years.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.018 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".