MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6925337210 · doi:10.17632/hjfp9c5gdr.1

A Longitudinal Dataset of Incidence and Intervention Policy Impacts Regarding the COVID-19 Pandemic in Canadian Provinces

2021· dataset· en· W6925337210 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueData Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) · 2021
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychiatric care and mental health services
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPandemicPsychological interventionIntervention (counseling)Longitudinal dataIncidence (geometry)Order (exchange)Baseline (sea)Public health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One year after identifying the first case of the 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in Canada, federal and provincial governments are still struggling to manage the pandemic. Provincial governments across Canada have experimented with widely varying policies in order to limit the burden of COVID-19. However, to date, the effectiveness of these policies has been difficult to ascertain. This is partly due to the lack of a publicly available, high-quality dataset on COVID-19 interventions and outcomes for Canada. The present paper provides a dataset containing important, Canadian-specific data that is known to affect COVID-19 outcomes, including sociodemographic, climatic, mobility and health system related information for all 10 Canadian provinces and their health regions. This dataset also includes longitudinal data on the daily number of COVID-19 cases, deaths, and the constantly changing intervention policies that have been implemented by each province in an attempt to control the pandemic.

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)0.009
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: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.967
Threshold uncertainty score0.240

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.010
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.345 · 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
GenreDataset

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueData Archiving and Networked Services (DANS)Same topicPsychiatric care and mental health servicesFrench-language works237,207