Health aspects of environmental impact assessment: Proceedings of a national workshop May 26-May 28, 1987, Ottawa, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The National Workshop on the Health Aspects of Environmental Impact Assessment was convened to respond to a need identified by the several sponsors to review the role that health professionals have played in environmental impact assessments (EIA) in Canada, and to discuss approaches and mechanisms for achieving greater involvement in the future. The co-sponsoring agencies reflect the breadth of interest in bringing public health considerations into Canada's environmental impact assessment processes. They were: Federal Environmental Assessment Review Office, Canadian Environmental Assessment Research Council, Health and Welfare Canada, Environment Canada, Ontario Waste Management Corporation, Atomic Energy Control Board, Pan American Health Organization, and Canadian Public Health Association. These agencies along with the Canadian Public Health Association which organized the workshop, have recognized the lack of involvement of health professionals and the limited consideration of public health issues in formal ElAs in this country. This workshop is an attempt to identify the constraints and find ways of overcoming them and, thereby, to facilitate participation and cooperation between the EIA and health communities. The objectives laid down through an iterative process among the co-sponsors were: 1. to incorporate public health consideration into environmental impact assessment in Canada, 2. to determine roles and responsibilities for achieving greater involvement of health professions in EIA activities, and 3. to identify mechanisms for developing stronger operational and research links between the EIA community and relevant health professionals
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.031 | 0.005 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".