MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2999848862 · doi:10.29173/hsi5

A Failure of Access?: The Birth Evacuation Policy in Canada’s North

2019· article· en· W2999848862 on OpenAlex
Helen Cerigo, Amelie Quesnel–Vallee

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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Science Inquiry · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceComputer securityComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The primary policy objective of the Canada Health Act is to maintain and improve the health of Canadians [1]. Under this Act all residents are entitled to reasonable and equitable access to all medically necessary hospital and physician care, free at the point of service. In practice, however, universal and equal health care access is challenged in Canada by a variety of factors, including di culties in sta ng availability and providing cost-eective services in rural and remote areas. Maternity care is one such medically necessary service that is not always reasonably and equally accessible. In the current health care delivery model, patients in remote areas of Canada often need to travel long-distances between communities or go south to access both specialized and standard maternity care. Since the 1980s, pregnant women in most Inuit communities, regardless of health risk, are flown to southern cities such as Iqaluit, Winnipeg, Ottawa, and Yellowknife to deliver approximately four to six weeks prior to their due date

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)0.002
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 score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.962

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.476
Teacher spread0.350 · 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