MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3111489316 · doi:10.17269/s41997-020-00449-5

No research about “them” without “them”: CJPH policy with regard to publication of health research on First Nations, Inuit, Métis and Indigenous Peoples

2020· editorial· en· W3111489316 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Louise Potvin

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Public Health · 2020
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsIndigenousPolitical scienceEconomic growthGeographyLibrary scienceGenealogyHistoryEconomicsBiologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.079
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.240
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Reporting · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.977
Threshold uncertainty score0.420

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0790.240
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.005
Bibliometrics0.0100.007
Science and technology studies0.0190.014
Scholarly communication0.0350.016
Open science0.0120.007
Research integrity0.1010.077
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.010

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 head0.200
GPT teacher head0.474
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
DomainReporting
GenreEditorial

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

Citations7
Published2020
Admission routes4
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Public Health→Same topicIndigenous Studies and Ecology→French-language works237,207→