MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6904780307 · doi:10.14288/1.0075963

Inventory 99 : a regional analysis of health personnel in the province of British Columbia

2014· article· en· W6904780307 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Collections · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Workforce Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman resourcesUnit (ring theory)Human healthUsabilityInformation systemHealth human resources

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Cooperative Health Human Resources Database (CHHRD), developed and maintained by the Health Human Resources Unit (HHRU) since 1973, provides the basis for a number of our regular and special reports. The INVENTORY series presents a regional analysis of health personnel in the province of British Columbia. The series has two components - INVENTORY and INVENTORY UPDATE - which are produced in alternate years. INVENTORY, published for odd-numbered years, contains information derived from the ROLLCALL series about selected health professions for which annual electronic data are available through the CHHRD. These data are owned by the regulatory bodies and professional associations of each group. The tables included in this report have been generated in response to a need for regional information about health human resources planning in British Columbia. They have been published in this format to increase the usability of ROLLCALL 99 information, but are not meant to replace that volume, which offers more detailed information about the thirty-three health occupations or groups included in INVENTORY 99.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score0.128

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0110.023
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.336 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Collections→Same topicGlobal Health Workforce Issues→French-language works237,207→