MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3142327965 · doi:10.3138/cbmh.454-062020

The History of Saskatchewan’s Public Health Association Policy Initiatives, 1954–86: A Regional Comparison for Preventative Health Policy Work in Canada

2021· article· en· W3142327965 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Helen Vandenberg, Wanda Martin, Marie Dietrich Leurer, Andrea Ens

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Health History · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPublic Health Policies and Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic healthHealth promotionSanitationWork (physics)MisinformationHealth policyPolitical scienceHygieneEnvironmental healthEconomic growthMedicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

After the Second World War, health prevention work in Canada shifted from a focus on sanitation and hygiene to illness prevention and health promotion. Canada became a significant global leader, beginning with the Lalonde Report of 1974. Yet less is known about the provincial public health associations and how their work differed from that of the national body. The purpose of this article is to examine the Saskatchewan Public Health Association's (SPHA) policy work from 1954 to 1986. Utilizing meeting minutes and newsletters, we found that while both national and provincial associations made efforts to prevent accidents, reduce tobacco use, and fluoridate water, the SPHA tended to advocate more for child health, and the cautious use of nuclear power. At the same time, the SPHA's resolutions tended to ignore emerging factors shaping health, including the social determinants of health, regional inequities, lack of public trust in experts, misinformation, and human psychology. Examining the SPHA's records revealed that region mattered in preventative policy work.

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 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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.710
Threshold uncertainty score0.824

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.014
Science and technology studies0.0250.007
Scholarly communication0.0080.002
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.150
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.281 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Health HistorySame topicPublic Health Policies and EducationFrench-language works237,207