MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4387978084 · doi:10.1353/nib.0.a911244

Healthcare Under Fire (Myanmar)

2023· article· en· W4387978084 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
One Exiled Doctor

Notice bibliographique

RevueNarrative Inquiry in Bioethics · 2023
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineHealth Professions
ThématiqueHealth and Conflict Studies
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMandateHealth careTask (project management)PaymentPsychologyPublic relationsSocial psychologyMedical emergencyBusinessMedicineLawPolitical scienceManagement

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Healthcare Under Fire: Stories from Healthcare Workers During Armed Conflict 13 asked for help with two things. I wanted to know what happened to the team and how to save them. The first request was met with appeasement, the second with hope for the best. Eventually, every organization had its limits and mandates. None of them had the mandate to save trapped data collectors in a village that was thought to be safe when randomly selected. Under fire, embarrassingly little is certain and what can be done is even less. Those were the hardest five days in the field. The task at hand was not only about finding my missing children but about keeping the survey running by the other teams who had to travel outside Nyala. I could see the fear in their eyes and feel it in their words. They had to make the hard choice between risking their lives and the payment they received that was at least four-fold what they would get from their governmental jobs. Finally, a call came. It was the one I was waiting for. The team leader told me in a tired voice, made even worse by the terrible signal that made his voice sound as if it were coming from a cave, that they managed to escape the village. They were all physically safe and he spared me the uncomfortable task of asking about the survey data by adding, ‘And we have the filled questionnaires with us.’ I cannot recall any comparable moment of relief. I called all the worried mothers and when the team arrived a day later, I joined them at each of their houses. No words could describe the feelings, the tears of joy, and the gaze of blame when the mothers saw their children safe. I gave them a break before asking them if they wanted to continue with the survey. I had to have an eye on the progress, the decaying budget spent on the daily payments, per diems, rentals, etc. and handle the growing feelings of concern. The headquarters in Khartoum was generous enough to send me an extra budget and a week’s extension. Seems like a happy end, right? I am not sure if a completed survey and well-paid yet traumatized young men and women counts as one. I had to move on and fly back to Khartoum, according to the plan for data entry and data analysis. The final reports had all the numbers the United Nations and the government needed. Very few people knew what the stories behind each of these numbers were. Even fewer people cared to know what the story is. We went to do a well-paid job and we did. When I returned to my office in Khartoum, one of my welcoming colleagues tried to tease me by saying, “Welcome the Lord of War!” with a smile on his face hinting at the generous payment I received. I smiled back and said, “You are right. I feel like one, but I bet you Nicholas Cage was paid much more.” I was referring to the movie that starred him with the same name. What made me feel less of a ‘Lord of War’ was a promise I gave to the people I left behind to make sure their stories remain alive and not hidden between the lines of the graphs in the report of the next survey.Almost all the assignments I submitted for the courses in my master’s in bioethics at the University of Toronto were about Darfur and the people of Darfur. My PhD in bioethics at the University of Birmingham was about them and dedicated to them. And here I am sharing this story with you in the hope that when you come across the next report from a survey conducted during an armed conflict, you would see the people. You would hear the people. You would feel the people—not only those surveyed but also the surveyors. We are all part of a story worth telling. B Healthcare Under Fire (Myanmar) One Exiled Doctor I used to work as a medical doctor in a less developed state than many big cities...

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 distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesÉtudes des sciences et des technologies, Intégrité de la recherche, Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: Qualitatif
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,444
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,001
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,003
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,002

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,451
Tête enseignante GPT0,568
Écart entre enseignants0,117 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeQualitatif
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2023
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueNarrative Inquiry in BioethicsMême sujetHealth and Conflict StudiesTravaux en français237 207