MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416788456 · doi:10.1136/bmjgh-2025-020393

‘Climate Change and Health Indicators’ and ‘Surgical System Strengthening’: an opportunity for synergy

2025· article· en· W4416788456 on OpenAlexaff
Callum Forbes, Radzi Hamzah, Elizabeth McLeod, John G. Meara, Ayla Gerk, Joseph Aryankalayil, Rashi Jhunjhunwala, Kee B. Park, Craig D. McClain, Maria Jose Garcia Fuentes, Alfredo Borrero Vega, Tarsicio Uribe‐Leitz, Joshua S Ng-Kamstra

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Global Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate Change and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClimate changePublic healthCarbon footprintHealth careGreenhouse gasSituatedHealthcare systemGovernment (linguistics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Climate change is a public health emergency. Yet, incongruously, the healthcare sector is a significant source of global greenhouse gas emissions. Surgical systems are uniquely situated to address this public health crisis due to the high carbon footprint associated with surgical care delivery and the ability of strong surgical systems to foster broader climate resilience. There is an urgent need for climate change and health indicators (CCHIs) specific to surgical care to address the environmental impacts of surgery and reduce the impacts of climate change on the health of individuals, populations and surgical care delivery. In proposing a set of example CCHIs pertinent to surgical care, we call the surgical community to action to improve and refine existing indicators while simultaneously engaging in national and regional surgical system strengthening efforts. Moreover, aligning such efforts can help bridge existing climate and health funding gaps which, to date, have proved a critical barrier to ensuring effective healthcare mitigation and adaptation.

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)0.066
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.080
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.347

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0660.080
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0070.007
Science and technology studies0.0030.021
Scholarly communication0.0200.030
Open science0.0030.028
Research integrity0.0120.023
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.121
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.305 · 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
GenreCommentary

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 venueBMJ Global HealthSame topicClimate Change and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207