MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2890203013 · doi:10.1111/polp.12269

Understanding Gaps in the Coexistence between Different Modes of Governance: A Case Study of Public Health in Schools in a Multilevel System

2018· article· en· W2890203013 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenuePolitics &amp Policy · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCommunity Health and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersMcGill UniversitySamfund og Erhverv, Det Frie Forskningsråd
KeywordsCorporate governancePublic healthMultilevel modelMulti-level governancePolitical scienceSociologyBusinessMedicineComputer scienceNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Governing contemporary public services across industrialized countries typically draws on a mix of different modes of governance. The literature on governance has raised the issue of the specific coexistences between different modes of governance. The focus is on fits and clashes, whereas there is less attention on situations, where different modes of governance do not connect. The contribution of the present article is to more systematically account for the “what” and “why” of such “gaps.” What are their specific characteristics? How can their existence be explained? Based on a critical case study of supporting coordination in public health services in Québec, the article argues: that gaps in the coexistence between different modes of governance can be thought of as disconnects in the management of public services; and that this reflects a de facto lack of governance capacity to connect different modes of governance to each other.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.197
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.578
GPT teacher head0.522
Teacher spread0.056 · 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