MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2956093497 · doi:10.1177/0091450919856635

Addiction and Heroin-Assisted Treatment: Legal Discourse and Drug Reform

2019· article· en· W2956093497 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueContemporary Drug Problems · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOpioid Use Disorder Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersSocial Science Research Council
KeywordsPlaintiffHeroinLawNoticeScholarshipPolitical scienceCharterCriminologyDrug courtSociologyPsychiatryMedicineDrug

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article analyzes the arguments put forth over a 3-day period at an injunction hearing, Providence Health Care Society v. Canada, held March 13–15, 2014 in Vancouver, British Columbia. The plaintiffs sought broad interlocutory relief from the Court for the provision of prescription heroin if requested by their physicians. This article fills an identified gap in scholarship by analyzing the civil Charter challenge, including the notice of civil claim, injunction court transcripts, judgment, and individual plaintiffs’ affidavits. We draw from Canada’s unique history of drug prohibition and critical drug research to contextualize our analysis and findings. We argue that the lives of people using criminalized drugs, such as heroin, are affected by legal realms that produce ideas about heroin, addiction, and criminality that ultimately impact public health policies and treatment initiatives.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.259
Threshold uncertainty score0.942

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.245 · 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