Bibliographic record
Abstract
The family physician already plays an extensive role as a provider of mental health care in almost every community in Canada. In theory, the family physician and the psychiatrist are natural partners in the mental health care system. While neither may be able to meet every need of a patient with a mental disorder, each can offer complementary services, which enables them to play a key role at different stages of an episode of illness and the subsequent period of recovery. Too often, however, family physicians and psychiatrists fail to establish the collaborative working relationships that would strengthen the role of the family physician, enhance the consultative role of the psychiatrist, and improve the quality of care their patients receive. The need to improve these relationships, a key step towards a better-integrated and more efficient health care system, becomes even more pressing in the current climate of rapid change in the organization of health care in Canadian provinces. Almost every province is now involved in reforming both its mental health care and primary care systems--often with minimal coordination of these processes. In addition, many communities across the country are witnessing rapid and often sweeping realignments of services, with an emphasis on shifting resources from hospital to community settings. These changes are likely to accentuate the role of primary care as the cornerstone of the health care
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 | 0.004 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.359 | 0.246 |
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".