MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4403910876 · doi:10.12927/hcq.2024.27440

From the Editors

2024· editorial· en· W4403910876 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Anne Wojtak, Richard Lewanczuk

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare Quarterly · 2024
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMental Health and Patient Involvement
Canadian institutionsAlberta Health ServicesCARE Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBest practiceMedicineBusinessMedical educationPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

) editorial with reflections on the current landscape in healthcare and what is top of mind for healthcare leaders. In this issue, we are instead starting with two welcomes and a fond farewell. Our first welcome is for Richard Lewanczuk as our new co-editor-in-chief alongside Anne Wojtak. Richard is the senior medical director of Health System Integration for Alberta Health Services and was previously the senior medical director of Primary Care for the same organization. He is also a professor emeritus in the Department of Medicine at the University of Alberta where he continues to co-chair the Social Determinants of Health Working Group. Our second welcome is for Ruby Brown who is a special guest editor for our theme on mental health (Brown and Wojtak 2024). Ruby has led health systems across several provinces and territories, with an unrelenting commitment to improve the state of mental health. She believes that the key to tackling the complexity of mental health and substance use lies in our ability to maintain consistent and steadfast cooperation across all segments of society. By sharing knowledge, we can gain deeper insights into national and global proceedings, which, in turn, enlighten and obligate us all to implement approaches essential for the greater well-being of Canadians. We are excited to have both of these wonderful leaders join our editorial team.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.099
Threshold uncertainty score0.332

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0090.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0060.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0990.092

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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.337 · 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
GenreEditorial

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
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare Quarterly→Same topicMental Health and Patient Involvement→French-language works237,207→