MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382134406 · doi:10.1503/cmaj.221587

Considerations for collecting data on race and Indigenous identity during health card renewal across Canadian jurisdictions

2023· article· en· W4382134406 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Andrew D. Pinto, Azza Eissa, Tara Kiran, Angela Mashford‐Pringle, Allison Needham, Irfan A. Dhalla

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Medical Association Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural Competency in Health Care
Canadian institutionsRoyal Victoria Regional Health CentreUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousRace (biology)Health careIdentity (music)White (mutation)Key (lock)MedicineGerontologyComputer scienceGender studiesSociologyPolitical scienceComputer securityLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

KEY POINTS In Canada, Indigenous and racialized patients have been shown to have worse access to health care, receive poorer care and have worse outcomes than White people.[1][1] A recent concept-mapping study found that Indigenous and racialized patients often feel belittled by clinicians and

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)0.126
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.237
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.959
Threshold uncertainty score0.668

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1260.237
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0100.012
Science and technology studies0.0180.005
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0090.008
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.327 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations16
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Medical Association JournalSame topicCultural Competency in Health CareFrench-language works237,207