Highlights of the new 7th edition of the Canadian Tuberculosis Standards
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Canada, tuberculosis remains a significant health concern. The overall reported incidence of active tuberculosis cases continues to decline, but certain sub-populations, such as Aboriginal and foreign-born populations, are disproportionately affected. To date, dedicated research has allowed us to progress in our understanding of the pathogenesis, immunology, and epidemiology of tuberculosis as well as in the development of new diagnostic and therapeutic tools. This 7th edition of the Canadian Tuberculosis Standards (the Standards) has been extensively revised to incorporate this new information, building upon the six previous versions (1). Each chapter is written by authors from across Canada with expertise in the specific areas. The Standards are intended to provide best practice information but are not meant to replace consultations with healthcare professionals. They do not supersede any provincial or territorial legislative, regulatory, policy, and practice requirements, or professional guidelines that govern the practice of health professionals in their respective jurisdictions, whose recommendations may differ due to local epidemiology or context. This summary highlights some of the key changes in recommendations.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".