MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396852968 · doi:10.1177/08404704241252032

Taking action towards climate-resilient, low-carbon, health systems: Perspectives from Canadian health leaders and healthcare professionals

2024· article· en· W4396852968 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Brittany Barber, Daniel Rainham, Peter Tyedmers, Trevor Vandertuin, Gillian Ritcey, Sean Christie

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare Management Forum · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate Change and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDalhousie University
KeywordsClimate changeHealth careBusinessGreenhouse gasHealthcare systemEnvironmental resource managementPublic relationsPolitical scienceEconomic growthEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Climate change poses significant public health and health system challenges including increased demand for health services due to chronic and acute health impacts from vector-borne diseases, heat-related illness, and injury from severe weather. As climate change worsens, so do its effects on health systems such as increasing severity of weather extremes causing damage to healthcare infrastructure and interference with supply chains. Ironically, health sectors globally are significant contributors to climate change, generating an estimated 5% of global emissions. Achieving "net zero" health systems require large-scale change with shared decision-making to coordinate a pan-Canadian approach to creating climate-resilient and low-carbon healthcare. In this article, we discuss healthcare professionals' and health leaders' perceptions of responsibility for practicing and advocating for climate-resilient and low-carbon healthcare in Canada.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.853
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0660.028
Scholarly communication0.0180.004
Open science0.0030.011
Research integrity0.0070.014
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare Management ForumSame topicClimate Change and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207