Notice bibliographique
Résumé
We would like to thank Waterman and Stolp for their interest in fostering the discussion on US–Mexico border health issues, and the Journal for allowing us to clarify one of the most important concepts developed in our December 2003 article. As we mentioned (p2017, first paragraph), and as Waterman and Stolp say in their letter, there was nothing purposely included in NAFTA to enhance collaboration on health-related issues with counterparts on the other side of the border. But this issue is beside the point. The argument we make is that NAFTA has not facilitated the erasing of the constraints that impede collaboration between health workers. We show that in a few instances it has increased them. Our conclusion is that globalization, as exemplified by NAFTA, benefits not the health of the people, but that of the transnational corporations. Looking at the impact of NAFTA in Canada, Labonte has arrived at similar conclusions.1 The contribution of our fieldwork is to detail how this occurs at the US–Mexico border. Other free trade agreements—the Free Trade Area of the Americas Agreement, the US–Central American Free Trade Agreement, the US–Australia Free Trade Agreement, the pending US–Morocco Free Trade Agreement, and others—do include health-related clauses, and the overwhelming assessment by experienced health organizations and observers in the field is that if Congress approves these agreements the damage to the health of these countries will be great.2–8 The need for binational collaboration is well recognized, and several agencies have invested considerable resources with different levels of success. Witnesses to these efforts agree on the slowness of these processes. A good example is the US–Mexico Border Health Commission: the idea was conceived in 1990, the creation of such a commission was approved by the US government in 1994, the commission was established in July 2000, its first official meeting was held in November of the same year, and the bylaws were approved in February 2003. As we explained in our article, executives of binational agencies need to take a deeper look at the context in which they are operating to be successful. If contextual constraints to their success are not systematically addressed, progress in US–Mexico border health will continue to be slow, marred with difficulties, and expensive in terms of both human and economic resources.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,006 | 0,034 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,006 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,005 | 0,005 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,007 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,020 | 0,023 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,067 | 0,021 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».