CMAJ•JAMC CMAJ 2008;179(12 SUPPL):S1-S25 Canadian Best Practice Recommendations for Stroke Care: Summary
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Canadian Stroke Strategy was initiated under the leader-ship of the Canadian Stroke Network and the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada. It brings together a multitude of stakeholders and partners to work toward the common goal of developing and implementing a coordinated and integrated approach to stroke prevention, treatment, rehabilitation and community reintegration in every province and territory in Canada. Enhanced access for all Canadians to integrated, high-quality and efficient stroke services will establish the Canadian Stroke Strategy as a model for innovative health system reform in Canada and internationally. The Canadian Stroke Strategy provides a framework to fa-cilitate the widespread adoption of evidence-based best prac-tices across the continuum of stroke care, focusing at 2 levels: • the national level, where the creation of working groups to address priority initiatives supports provincial and territo-rial work through coordination, content development and communication; • the provincial/territorial level, where implementation of best practices in stroke prevention, treatment, rehabilita-tion and community reintegration occurs at the front lines of health care. Best Practices and Standards represent 1 of 5 Canadian Stroke Strategy national priority platforms. The goal of the Best Practices and Standards platform is to transform stroke prevention and care, ensuring that evidence-based best prac-tices are integrated into the Canadian health system. The development and dissemination of the Canadian Best Practice Recommendations for Stroke Care begins to address this goal. The Best Practices and Standards Working Group was es-tablished in response to the observation that stroke research findings do not always reach health care professionals, hospi-tal administrators, health ministries and, most importantly, persons with stroke. Thus, best practices are not consistently applied, leaving a significant gap in the quality of stroke care between what should be done and what is being done. The primary goal of the Canadian Stroke Strategy is to help close this gap. The membership list for the Best Practices and Stan-
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 | 0.027 | 0.103 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.013 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.030 | 0.015 |
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".