Publication of this special peer-reviewed insert on Skin Cancer Prevention in Canada has been funded by Alberta Health Services and the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this special insert to the Canadian Journal of Public Health, sixarticles reviewed: 1) the UV Index, its geographic distribution,and the factors affecting it, 2) the methodology for a recent Cana-dian population-based survey about sun exposure and sun protec-tion behaviours, 3) sun behaviour in Canadian children, 4) work-time sun behaviours among Canadian outdoor workers, 5) the burden of malignancy subsequent to primary skin cancer, and 6) a comprehensive skin cancer prevention framework. The report1 that there has been a 2.5 % to 5 % increase in the UV Index in Canada since the 1970s is both consistent with prior reports2,3 and reflects the importance of efforts to reduce excess exposure to ultraviolet radiation (UVR) in many diverse Canadian recreational and occupational contexts. The two papers that review sun behaviour among children4 and among outdoor workers5 in Canada are both based on the second national sun survey that consisted of two questionnaires adminis-tered to two samples of adults (ages 16+ years).6 Data were collect-
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 | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.472 | 0.104 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".