Aviation Safety vs. Medical Confidentiality: Disclosure of Health Information for Accident Prevention and Investigation
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: In this article an analysis is made of existing legal provisions and policies regarding medical confidentiality and the use of medical information on pilots, for the reporting of unfit pilots and for accident and incident investigation. An overview is given of the applicable international, European and several national legal frameworks in relation to this question. The applicable national legislation and relating policies of the Netherlands, the U.S., and Canada are compared on this subject. These three States (countries) are selected because of the differences between them in legal provisions when it comes to medical confidentiality of pilots’ health information. The article will conclude with tools derived from this analysis, which can be used to find a balance between medical confidentiality vs. aviation safety. Schuite JM. Aviation safety vs. medical confidentiality: disclosure of health information for accident prevention and investigation. Aerosp Med Hum Perform. 2019; 90(10):872–881.
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 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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 it