MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Rationale, design, and methods for Canadian alliance for healthy hearts and minds cohort study (CAHHM) – a Pan Canadian cohort study

2016· other· en· W6902375546 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2016
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubclinical infectionCohort studyCohortProspective cohort studyDiseaseCardiovascular healthBlood pressureAlliance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background The Canadian Alliance for Healthy Hearts and Minds (CAHHM) is a pan-Canadian, prospective, multi-ethnic cohort study being conducted in Canada. The overarching objective of the CAHHM is to understand the association of socio-environmental and contextual factors (such as societal structure, activity, nutrition, social and tobacco environments, and access to health services) with cardiovascular risk factors, subclinical vascular disease, and cardiovascular and other chronic disease outcomes. Methods/Design Participants between 35 and 69 years of age are being recruited from existing cohorts and a new First Nations Cohort to undergo a detailed assessment of health behaviours (including diet and physical activity), cognitive function, assessment of their local home and workplace environments, and their health services access and utilization. Physical measures including weight, height, waist/hip circumference, body fat percentage, and blood pressure are collected. In addition, eligible participants undergo magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the brain, heart, carotid artery and abdomen to detect early subclinical vascular disease and ectopic fat deposition. Discussion CAHHM is a prospective cohort study designed to investigate the impact of community level factors, individual health behaviours, and access to health services, on cognitive function, subclinical vascular disease, fat distribution, and the development of chronic diseases among adults living in Canada.

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)0.102
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.085
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: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.592
Threshold uncertainty score0.811

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1020.085
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0070.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0070.003
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0300.006

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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.303 · 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
GenreProtocol

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshare→French-language works237,207→