MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4414920470 · doi:10.64490/ijra8111

Évaluation de projets visant à favoriser l’accès à la saine alimentation, financés dans le cadre de la mesure 3.1 de la Politique gouvernementale de prévention en santé

2025· report· fr· W4414920470 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Andrée Fafard, Élise Jalbert-Arsenault

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Systems and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Rail transportationDemocratic legitimacy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ce rapport présente les résultats d’une évaluation qui avait pour but de mieux comprendre les facteurs ayant influencé la proposition, la mise en œuvre et la pérennisation d'interventions visant à améliorer l’accès à une saine alimentation, financées dans le cadre de l’action 2 de la mesure 3.1 du Plan d’action interministériel 2017-2021 de la Politique gouvernementale de prévention en santé. La mesure 3.1 de la Politique gouvernementale de prévention en santé a pour but de favoriser l’accès physique et économique à une saine alimentation, particulièrement dans les communautés défavorisées ou isolées géographiquement. Lors de la mise en œuvre du Plan d’action interministériel 2017-2021 associé à cette politique, 151 projets, répartis dans toutes les régions du Québec, ont reçu du financement. Dans le Plan d’action interministériel 2022-2025, le ministère de la Santé et des Services sociaux a confié le mandat à l’Institut national de santé publique du Québec d’évaluer ces projets.

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)0.068
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.071
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score0.357

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0680.071
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.479
Teacher spread0.411 · 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 designObservational
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 topicHealthcare Systems and Practices→French-language works237,207→