MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Industry sponsored harm reduction conference courts Indigenous peoples in Canada

2020· article· en· W3029656375 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Sheryl Thompson, Julia Smith, Kelley Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueTobacco Control · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSmoking Behavior and Cessation
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Indigenous Peoples' HealthSimon Fraser University
FundersFirst Nations Health AuthorityCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsIndigenousHarm reductionHarmMetisTobacco industrySmoking cessationPolitical sciencePublic relationsPublic healthMedicineLawNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In November 2019, Jeff Gaulin, Director External Affairs with Rothmans, Benson & Hedges Inc (RBH) opened a conference in Calgary, Canada. RBH was not listed on any of the promotional material or the registration platform but Gaulin announced he was one of the driving forces behind the event and he asked the audience of Indigenous health professionals and advocates, “So why is the world’s largest maker of cigarettes assembling a harm reduction conference?”.1 It’s a good question. RBH’s audience was an impressive list of leading Indigenous scholars and public health professionals attending a Harm Reduction Forum at the Grey Eagle Resort and Casino to discuss supporting people impacted by addiction. In his opening remarks, Gaulin claimed that RBH was ‘transforming’, seeking an ‘unsmoked Canada’. He set cessation as the goal and listed the benefits and relative safety of vape products as smoke-free alternative technologies to smoking. As Cree-Metis scholars and settler allies, who have studied the tobacco industry and commercial tobacco use in Indigenous communities, we have deep concerns …

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 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 score0.221
Threshold uncertainty score0.822

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTobacco ControlSame topicSmoking Behavior and CessationFrench-language works237,207