MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7073526792

THE DETERMINANTS OF HEALTHY EATING AMONG LOW-INCOME CANADIANS

2008· report· en· W7073526792 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueQSpace (Queen's University Library) · 2008
Typereport
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPrenatal Screening and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsNucleofectionGestational periodTSG101DysgeusiaDiafiltrationLiquationHyporeflexiaTriacetinDemotion
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This scoping paper on the state of knowledge regarding the determinants of healthy eating for low-income Canadians was commissioned by the Office of Nutrition Policy and Promotion, Health Canada. It is one of a series of papers regarding the determinants of healthy eating. For published, short versions of the series of papers, please see the special issue of the Canadian Journal of Public Health, volume 96, supplement 3, "Understanding the Forces that Influence Our Eating Habits: What We Know and Need to Know"

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.290

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.009
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations40
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQSpace (Queen's University Library)Same topicPrenatal Screening and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207