MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411941265 · doi:10.1186/s12919-025-00332-6

Proceedings from the 2023 transdisciplinary conference for future leaders in precision public health “Applying Implementation Science to Precision Public Health”

2025· article· en· W4411941265 on OpenAlexaff
Katherine W. Saylor, Caitlin G. Allen, Jarrod Marable, Dana Lee Olstad, Julia Steinberg, Amelia K. Smit, Erin Turbitt, Kimberly Foss, Latrice Landry, Megan C. Roberts

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Proceedings · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Policy Implementation Science
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic healthDisseminationContext (archaeology)Population healthData sharingHealth equityEquity (law)Best practiceMedicineKnowledge managementData sciencePublic engagementPublic relationsComputer sciencePolitical scienceAlternative medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Precision public health (PPH) approaches use big data to inform tailored, population-level interventions. The field has roots in genomics, but it has expanded to encompass data-informed public health programs across various types of data or applications. The Precision Public Health Network hosted a 2023 conference focused on implementation science-the study of how to integrate PPH programs into practice. Some implementation needs that emerged across speakers included establishing robust evidence of clinical utility and feasibility, disseminating clinical best practices through guidelines and tools for providers, sharing tools or information to reduce duplicated efforts across settings, and considering context-specific factors. Considering feasibility, setting-specific factors, and meaningful engagement with relevant user groups throughout the research and implementation process are critical to the successful and sustainable implementation of PPH programs. The Network also hosted an interactive workshop to generate ideas and ongoing collaboration on essential outcomes or data measures for PPH programs, and strategies to center health equity in PPH. This conference and workshop are part of the ongoing work of the PPHN to convene experts across disciplines and settings, share knowledge, and galvanize the field of PPH.

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)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.366
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.007
Science and technology studies0.0050.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.632
GPT teacher head0.641
Teacher spread0.010 · 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.

Study designQualitative
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC ProceedingsSame topicHealth Policy Implementation ScienceFrench-language works237,207