MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4408673829 · doi:10.12927/hcpap.2025.27534

The Canada Health Act and Mental Health and Addiction Services

2025· article· en· W4408673829 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Erika Dyck

Bibliographic record

VenueA Nudge Too Far? A Nudge at All? On Paying People to Be Healthy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOpioid Use Disorder Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthAddictionMental Health ActPsychiatryPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

(CHA) (1985) comes at an auspicious time in healthcare history, having just experienced a major global pandemic that tested both the foundations and the flexibility of Canadian medicare. Several services suffered under the pressure of the pandemic, including mental health. Despite its historic position as a public or charitable service, mental health and addiction care has been pushed to the edges of our publicly funded health system. On this anniversary of the CHA, the author reflects on this historical trajectory by revisiting the origins of medicare and the impact of psychiatric deinstitutionalization.

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)0.012
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.939
Threshold uncertainty score0.440

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0130.004
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0100.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.003

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueA Nudge Too Far? A Nudge at All? On Paying People to Be Healthy→Same topicOpioid Use Disorder Treatment→French-language works237,207→