Canadian Cardiovascular Harmonized National Guideline Endeavour (C-CHANGE) guideline for the prevention and management of cardiovascular disease in primary care: 2022 update
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The goal of the Canadian Cardiovascular Harmonized National Guideline Endeavour (C-CHANGE) process is to give all Canadian health care providers easy access to a comprehensive and practical set of harmonized guideline recommendations. Clinicians claim that there are too many guidelines with too many individual recommendations to be practical and accessible for primary care; that their patients' multimorbidity requires them to access many guidelines at the same time; and that at least in the past, some of the recommendations were not harmonized and seemed contradictory. It is designed to help clinicians formulate comprehensive treatment plans for use by all members of the health care team to address multimorbidity, as recommended by the Canadian Heart Health Strategy and Action Plan. 2 This fourth update was necessitated by recent changes to the guidelines included in previous updates and the addition of guidelines from 3 guideline groups new to the C-CHANGE process (Canadian Cardio vascular Society/Canadian Heart Rhythm Society guideline for the management of atrial fibrillation, Health Canada's Dietary Guideline and the Canadian Consensus Conference on Diagnosis and Treatment of Dementia) (Appendix 1, available at www.cmaj.ca/lookup/doi/10.1503/cmaj.220138/tab-related -content), thus increasing the comprehensiveness from the 2011, 1 2014 3 and 2018 4 versions to a total of 11 guideline groups.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it