MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411377541 · doi:10.17269/s41997-025-01064-y

Helping people access benefits: Millions of unclaimed federal dollars are available

2025· article· en· W4411377541 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Noralou P. Roos, Sharon Macdonald, Eileen Boriskewich, Leslíe L. Roos, Sally Massey-Wiebe, Colleen Metge

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Public Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealthcare innovation and challenges
Canadian institutionsManitoba Beekeepers' AssociationUniversity of ManitobaManitoba Health
FundersWinnipeg Foundation
KeywordsOutreachGovernment (linguistics)OfficerWork (physics)Public relationsPovertyEmpowermentBusinessIntervention (counseling)MedicineMedical educationPolitical scienceNursingEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SETTING: The GetYourBenefits! Project began as an attempt to convince physicians that it is important to diagnose and treat poverty. INTERVENTION: The academics worked with community agencies and physician organizations to communicate about the government benefits for which individuals with low incomes and/or disabilities are eligible. The Project Manager and Outreach Officer met with and gave talks to community groups. The Financial Literacy and Empowerment Program Coordinator, Community Financial Counselling Services (CFCS), who leads Manitoba's free tax filing clinics, led the development of the Get Your Benefits booklet. The authors decided communicating about the project was important. The project was funded by the Winnipeg Foundation with the collaboration of the Manitoba government and is being continued by CFCS. OUTCOMES: This paper describes how information on accessing benefits has been communicated to physicians, health care providers, and those who work in public health. Over 170,000 booklets were distributed. By the final year of the project (2023), over 85 websites had linked to the project website, a major growth over the nine websites linked in the first year of the project. Several updates a year were sent advising on opportunities for accessing benefits, with more than 270 individuals and organizations receiving these in the last year of the project. IMPLICATIONS: Accessing these benefits has brought and could bring additional millions of unclaimed federal dollars to eligible individuals across Canada. There is still much to be done.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.794
Threshold uncertainty score0.957

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.174
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.218 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Public HealthSame topicHealthcare innovation and challengesFrench-language works237,207