MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3166051409 · doi:10.1080/09553002.2021.1941379

COHERE – strengthening cooperation within the Canadian government on radiation research

2021· article· en· W3166051409 on OpenAlexaffabout
Vinita Chauhan, Julie Leblanc, Baki Sadi, Julie Burtt, Kiza Sauvé, Rachel Lane, Kristi Randhawa, Ruth C. Wilkins, Debora Quayle

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Radiation Biology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEffects of Radiation Exposure
Canadian institutionsCanadian Nuclear Safety CommissionHealth Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelevance (law)Government (linguistics)CommissionGeneral partnershipBusinessPolitical sciencePublic relationsEnvironmental healthMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Canadian Organization on Health Effects from Radiation Exposure (COHERE) is a government initiative to better understand biological and human health risks from ionizing radiation exposures relevant to occupational and environmental settings (<100 mGy, <6 mGy/h). It is currently a partnership between two federal agencies, Health Canada (HC) and the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC). COHERE's vision is to contribute knowledge to reduce scientific uncertainties from low dose and dose-rate exposures. COHERE will advance our understanding by bridging the knowledge gap between human health risks and linkages to molecular- and cellular-level responses to radiation. Research focuses on identifying sensitive, early, and key molecular events of relevance to risk assessment. CONCLUSIONS: The initiative will address questions of relevance to better apprize Canadians, including radiation workers and members of the public and Indigenous peoples, on health risks from low dose radiation exposure and inform radiation protection frameworks at a national and international level. Furthermore, it will support global efforts to conduct collaborative undertakings and better coordinate research. Here, we describe a historical overview of the research conducted, the strategic research agenda that outlines the scientific framework, stakeholders, opportunities to harmonize internationally, and how research outcomes will better inform communication of risk to Canadians.

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)0.125
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.099
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.841
Threshold uncertainty score0.975

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1250.099
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0090.008
Science and technology studies0.0200.014
Scholarly communication0.0130.006
Open science0.0090.020
Research integrity0.0130.014
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.004

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.337 · 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 designNot applicable
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Radiation BiologySame topicEffects of Radiation ExposureFrench-language works237,207