MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3165690667 · doi:10.32866/001c.24082

The Accessibility Implications of a Pilot COVID-19 Vaccination Program in Hamilton, Ontario

2021· article· en· W3165690667 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueFindings · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies
Canadian institutionsThe Scarborough HospitalUniversity of TorontoMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Government (linguistics)Pilot programVaccinationGeographyDistribution (mathematics)PharmacyPopulation2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)SocioeconomicsBusinessEnvironmental healthMedicineVirologySociologyFamily medicineOutbreakMedical education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Government of Ontario in Canada announced the pilot for a new vaccination program, with designated pharmacies across the province now able to offer COVID-19 vaccines. The accessibility of this program raises questions about travel times to vaccination sites and the distribution of these times among the population. In our examination of the City of Hamilton we find that selected sites do not serve rural and urban residents well; particularly, the associated cost of travel (in terms of travel time) is expected to be disproportionally borne by lower income urban populations and rural residents. Modest additions to the list of pilot sites in the city can substantially alleviate this inequity.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.204
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.017
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.324
GPT teacher head0.481
Teacher spread0.158 · 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