MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400486444 · doi:10.1080/22423982.2024.2371623

Updated review on contaminant communication experiences in the circumpolar Arctic

2024· review· en· W4400486444 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Eva M. Krümmel, Amanda D. Boyd, Danielle Brandow, Michael Brubaker, Chris Furgal, Robert Gerlach, Brian Laird, Mélanie Lemire, Lisa L. Loseto, Gert Mulvad, Shannon P. O’Hara, Kristín Ólafsdóttir, Jennifer F. Provencher, Mylène Ratelle, Arja Rautio, Kelly Skinner, Pál Weihe, Maria Wennberg

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Circumpolar Health · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArctic and Russian Policy Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalTrent UniversityEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaFisheries and Oceans CanadaUniversity of WaterlooInuit Circumpolar Council
FundersNorthern Contaminants ProgramHealth Canada
KeywordsCircumpolar starArcticThe arcticEnvironmental scienceGeographyOceanographyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Arctic populations are amongst the highest exposed populations to long-range transported contaminants globally, with the main exposure pathway being through the diet. Dietary advice is an important immediate means to address potential exposure and help minimize adverse health effects. The objective of this work is to enable easier access to dietary advice and communication guidance on contaminants with a focus on the Arctic. This manuscript is part of a special issue summarizing the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme's Assessment 2021: Human Health in the Arctic. The information was derived with internet searches, and by contacting relevant experts directly. Results include risk communication efforts in European Arctic countries, effectiveness evaluation studies for several Arctic countries, experience of social media use, and the advantages and challenges of using social media in risk communication. We found that current risk communication activities in most Arctic countries emphasize the importance of a nutritious diet. Contaminant-related restrictions are mostly based on mercury; a limited amount of dietary advice is based on other contaminants. While more information on effectiveness evaluation was available, specific information, particularly from Arctic countries other than Canada, is still very limited.

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)0.006
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.828
Threshold uncertainty score0.668

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.477
Teacher spread0.374 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Circumpolar HealthSame topicArctic and Russian Policy StudiesFrench-language works237,207