Introducing Health Data Research Network Canada (HDRN Canada): A New Organization to Advance Canadian And International Population Data Science
Bibliographic record
Abstract
IntroductionNotwithstanding Canada’s exceptional longitudinal health data and research centres with extensive experience transforming data into knowledge, many Canadian studies based on linked administrative data have focused on a single province or territory. Health Data Research Network Canada (HDRN Canada), a new not-for-profit corporation, will bring together major national, provincial and territorial health data stewards from across Canada. HDRN Canada’s first initiative is the $81 million SPOR Canadian Data Platform funded under the Canadian Institutes of Health Research Strategy for Patient-Oriented Research (SPOR). Objectives and ApproachHDRN Canada is a distributed network through which individual data-holding centres work together to (i) create a single portal and support system for researchers requesting multi-jurisdictional data, (ii) harmonize and validate case definitions and key analytic variables across jurisdictions, (iii) expand the sources and types of data linkages, (iv) develop technological infrastructure to improve data access and collection, (v) create supports for advanced analytics and (vi) establish strong partnerships with patients, the public and with Indigenous communities. We will share our experiences and gather international feedback on our network and its goals from symposium participants. ResultsIn January 2020, HDRN Canada launched its Data Access Support Hub (DASH) which includes an inventory listing over 380 datasets, information about more than 120 algorithms and a repository of requirements and processes for accessing data. HDRN Canada is receiving requests for multi-province research studies that would be challenging to conduct without HDRN Canada. Conclusion / ImplicationsThus far, HDRN Canada services and tools have been developed primarily for Canadian researchers but HDRN Canada can also serve as a prompt for an international discussion about what has/has not worked in terms of multi-jurisdictional research data infrastructure. It can also present an opportunity for the development of metadata, standards and common approaches that support more multi-country research.
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 | 0.103 | 0.117 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.020 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.019 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.018 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.034 | 0.009 |
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".