MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407276773 · doi:10.54254/2754-1169/2025.20683

Exploring the Development of Canada’s Smart Healthcare System in the Digital Era

2025· article· en· W4407276773 on OpenAlexaffabout
Yitian Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Economics Management and Political Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealthcare Systems and Public Health
Canadian institutionsEarl Haig Secondary School
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHealthcare systemHealth carePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the digital era, the need for a robust and efficient healthcare system is paramount, particularly for developed countries like Canada. This paper explores the feasibility and potential benefits of integrating smart healthcare solutions into the Canadian healthcare system to address its current shortcomings. Despite Canada’s comprehensive healthcare services, issues such as long waiting times, a shortage of medical professionals, and insufficient coverage in remote areas persist. The research utilizes a combination of literature review and case study methods to analyze existing problems and the impact of smart technologies in healthcare. By proposing the implementation of intelligent triage systems, a unified national electronic health record (EHR), and extensive telemedicine services, this study aims to enhance healthcare accessibility, improve service delivery, and increase overall system efficiency. The anticipated outcome is a more responsive healthcare system that can better meet the needs of Canada’s diverse population. The findings will contribute to ongoing discussions and development strategies within Canadian healthcare policy circles.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.834
Threshold uncertainty score0.968

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0100.004
Scholarly communication0.0090.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.263 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Economics Management and Political SciencesSame topicHealthcare Systems and Public HealthFrench-language works237,207