MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Data on Multiple Health Topics

2007· book-chapter· en· W647359066 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sarah Boslaugh

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2007
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Disease Management Strategies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer sciencePsychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter discusses five surveys that gather information on multiple health-related topics. The National Health Examination Surveys (NHES) and its continuation, the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), have been conducted periodically since 1960 and collect data on a wide variety of health topics through personal interview and direct physical examination. The National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) has been conducted annually since 1957 and gathers information through personal interviews with members of a representative sample of American households. The Joint Canada/United States Survey of Health (JCUSH) was conducted in 2002 to 2003, with a random sample of adults age 18 and older in Canada and the United States, was the first survey to collect comprehensive information about health and health care access in both countries. The Longitudinal Studies of Aging (LSOAs) consist of four surveys designed to study longitudinal changes in the health, functional status, living arrangements, and health services of older Americans as they age; the LSOAs were begun in 1984, and data were most recently collected in 2000. The State and Local Area Integrated Telephone Survey (SLAITS) is a data collection mechanism that has been used to conduct a number of different health-related surveys at the national, state, and local levels since 1997. The National Health Examination Survey and the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey The NHES and the NHANES form part of an ongoing effort to collect data on illness and disability in the United States.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.111
Threshold uncertainty score0.372

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1110.034

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 head0.139
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.170 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooks→Same topicChronic Disease Management Strategies→French-language works237,207→