MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405790288 · doi:10.1080/1059924x.2024.2446256

Incorporating occupational health and safety into One Health approaches to aquaculture

2024· article· en· W4405790288 on OpenAlexafffund
Lissandra Souto Cavalli

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agromedicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine Bivalve and Aquaculture Studies
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersOcean Frontier Institute
KeywordsOccupational safety and healthAquacultureRelevance (law)Human healthNorwegianEnvironmental healthOccupational health nursingBusinessEnvironmental planningRisk analysis (engineering)Environmental resource managementPublic healthHealth promotionMedicineFisheryFish <Actinopterygii>Environmental sciencePolitical scienceNursingBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One Health approaches emphasize intersections between animal health, environmental well-being and human health. Unfortunately, one health approaches rarely explicitly encompass occupational health and safety. This short report provides a concise introduction to the One Health principle, highlighting its potential relevance to improving occupational health and safety in aquaculture. It draws on recent risk assessment research on mass mortality events in marine salmon aquaculture and Norwegian calls for the implementation of holistic risk assessment approaches within aquaculture that encompass attention to occupational, environmental and animal health to illustrate how such one health approaches can help to improve aquaculture OHS. This report draws on reflections contained in a keynote address to IFISH6 in January 2024.

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)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.129

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.041
Scholarly communication0.0110.009
Open science0.0020.015
Research integrity0.0080.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of AgromedicineSame topicMarine Bivalve and Aquaculture StudiesFrench-language works237,207