Seventy Years and Counting: The Canadian Association of Radiologists’ Journal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canadian radiology has its roots embedded in Montréal and this is no less true of the Canadian Association of Radiologists Journal, now celebrating its 70th Anniversary with the appointment of a new editor. A journal, Les Rayons-X—a monthly illustrated review published in Montréal and edited by Dr Henri Lasnier– preceded it by 40 years. Les Rayons-X was to last only 7 issues. However, Dr Lasnier clearly recognized the importance of a journal to what was then an emerging specialty. By 1950, the Canadian Association of Radiologists became the first specialty society in Canada to publish a scientific journal. We reflect on some facets of the evolution of the journal from a cottage industry to its adoption by a major publishing house and through the hands of 14 editors. In that time, radiology itself has undergone remarkable changes in its technological infrastructure leading to profound changes in the capacity of radiological practitioners and scientists to diagnose and treat disease. These changes themselves impose some constraints on a general radiology journal. The Association has at times faced substantial challenges that led to questions about its ability to sustain a journal in the face of competing priorities. Those challenges will likely recur in the future, not least in the face of other better-resourced journals. As the Canadian Association of Radiologists has evolved into a distinctive voice in Canadian medicine, we argue that a strong case can be made for preserving a platform for Canadian radiology featuring Canadian observations and perspectives, both scientific and “political.”
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.017 | 0.064 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.027 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.015 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.008 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".