Bibliographic record
Abstract
Thanks to JHCPU Reviewers Virginia M. Brennan, PhD, MA The scholars, scientists, clinicians, and community-based workers who review manuscripts for JHCPU perform a critical service, making the Journal what it is. All papers published in JHCPU have received two or more blind external peer reviews; most often, they go through a revision or two, for which the reviewers are also consulted. Furthermore, the reviews that we receive often go above and beyond the call of duty in how insightful and thorough they are. This Note from the Editor will serve as an introduction and an acknowledgment of our most active peer reviewers. The first list below is the short one—these are people who have written 20 or more high-quality reviews for JHCPU. They are true associates of the editorial team. We rely on their judgement and detailed assessments very regularly. The second list below is longer and just as important—these are people who have written between 10 and 19 high-quality reviews. Like the people on the short list, these reviewers shape the Journal in fundamental ways. Finally, online we list everyone who has reviewed for us during the past year. These reviewers are also big contributors: each one has completed between one and nine reviews. We are including these lists partly to show our readers and authors more about JHCPU's peer review process. We are also including them to acknowledge the reviewers publicly: without them, JHCPU would not exist. List One: Peer reviewer of 20 or more manuscripts Nelson Aguila NCI Center to Reduce Cancer Health Disparities (CRCHD) Thomas Arcury Wake Forest School of Medicine, Family & Community Medicine Sarah Blake Emory University, Rollins School of Public Health Earle Chambers Albert Einstein College of Medicine of Yeshiva University Family and Social Medicine Christopher Duffrin East Carolina University, Brody School of Medicine, Family Medicine Michelle Andrasik University of Washington, Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences Donna Biederman Duke University School of Nursing William Brandon University of North Carolina at Charlotte Professor Emeritus, Department of Political Science and Public Administration Jennifer Chen Harbor-UCLA Department of Emergency Medicine Caswell Evans University of Illinois, Chicago, Emeritus Professor [End Page vii] Alida M. Gertz University of Washington, Global Health Steven Hill Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), Center for Financing, Access and Cost Trends (CFACT) Roy Grant Children's Health Fund, retired List Two: Peer reviewer of 10–19 manuscripts Diane Abatemarco Thomas Jefferson University Salam Abdus Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Jemma Alarcon University of California Irvine School of Medicine Beth Allen Allen Editorial Services and Syneos Health Mamie Anim Five Rivers Health Centers and Wright State University A. Ariza Children's Memorial Hospital, Child Health Research Renee Badzow D'Youville University, Health Administration and Public Health Aparna Balakrishnan Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine Ashley R. Banks Nationwide Children's Hospital Research Institute-Center for Innovation and Pediatric Practice Shoshana Bardach The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy & Clinical Practice Carey R. Bayer Morehouse School of Medicine Community Health and Preventive Medicine Satcher Health Leadership Institute Czarina Behrends Weill Cornell Medical College, Healthcare Research & Policy R. Benkert Wayne State University, Nursing Dave Bergeron Université du Québec à Rimouski, Department of Nursing Elizabeth Beverly Ohio University Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine Annika Billhult University of Borås Mara Bird NCLR/CSULB Center for Latino Community Health, Evaluation and Leadership Training Sarah Blackstone University of Virginia School of Medicine Department of Family Medicine Janice Blanchard George Washington University Medical School Deborah J. Bowen University of Washington, Bioethics and Humanities Melissa Bright University of Florida, Department of Health Outcomes and Policy Kelly Brittain Michigan State University College of Nursing Thomas D. Brothers Dalhousie University and University College London Todd Brown University of Alabama at Birmingham, Division of Cardiology Linda Bullock University of Virginia, School of Nursing Lillian Burke East Carolina University, Division of Hematology / Oncology [End Page viii] M. Byrne University of Miami, Department of Epidemiology Quinn Capers University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center Patricia Carcaise-Edinboro Virginia Commonwealth University Department of Health Administration Heather Carmack James Madison University, School of Communication Studies Mark Cartoski Virginia Commonwealth University-Medical College of Virginia Natalie A. Ceballos Texas State University, Psychology Avik Chatterjee...
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.021 | 0.241 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.190 | 0.171 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".