MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381185792 · doi:10.32920/23542092.v1

Bridging Gaps Between Public Health and the Environment: A Policy Evaluation of the Federal Framework on Lyme Disease Act and Related Initiatives

2023· preprint· en· W4381185792 on OpenAlexafffund
Golnoosh Siavash-Moakhar

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRisk Perception and Management
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityUniversity of Toronto
FundersPublic Health Agency of Canada
KeywordsLyme diseasePublic healthStakeholderPublic policyHealth policyPolitical sciencePublic administrationPublic relationsBusinessMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>The need for integration of environmental policy and public health has become ever more evident with the increasing case numbers of Lyme disease, a problem greatly exacerbated by climate change. The purpose of this study was to conduct a policy evaluation of the Federal Framework on Lyme Disease Act (FFLDA) and associated initiatives from an integrated environmental and public health perspective. The chosen methodology was document analysis. This thesis sought to evaluate the significance of the FFLDA for environmental law and to assess stakeholder initiatives and risk communication strategies from an environmental health perspective. This thesis emphasized a locally-oriented policy approach for addressing Lyme disease focused upon citizen science, improved signage, technological tools, and media coverage. Policy recommendations were formulated for Lyme disease management and the progression of the policy goals of the FFLDA. Such recommendations aim to bridge gaps between environmental policy and public health.</p>

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.802
Threshold uncertainty score0.626

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.132
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRisk Perception and ManagementFrench-language works237,207