Covid reflections: a reader
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This is a collection of personal and professional reflective experiences shaped by the Covid crisis from across the UK public health community, curated and edited by Royal Society for Public Health colleagues Colonel David Bates and Richard Shircore (David also leads the context discussion). This Reader consists of seven independent papers reflecting on the Covid Pandemic from March 2020 to October 2022. Its development has been prompted by the Hallet Enquiry (sic) into the crisis created by the event that continues to shape socioeconomic and political conditions in the UK and globally which continue to severely weaken human security. The team felt that although the strategic response to the pandemic was being considered in detail no strategy can be formulated without understanding how it impacts on the field workers, planning staffs and the public. This Reader seeks to redress this knowledge deficit. The Editors used their personal contacts and social media to request contributions starting in October 2023 and are very grateful for the frank and fulsome response of contributors. Apart from editing some sections, for clarity and focus, the Editors have not attempted to influence any of the content, hence each paper appears unique in the author’s original style including typography. This provides a strong ethnographic message that this is about individual understanding turned into intelligent discourse through personal reflection. Each author was invited to reflect on the issues following their professional or clinical experience of ‘Covid’ that impacted on their responsibilities and areas of influence in order to address the challenge of how pandemics and epidemics could or should be managed better. A common theme is that both prevention and management of pandemics are significantly enhanced by political and health policy adhering to the key elements of the Ottawa Charter which has health security at its core. The authors were therefore specifically requested to focus on their reflections with a view to gathering their qualitative opinions based on their expertise rather than crafting an academic paper for peer review with references. This collection may serve as the framework for a formal paper in due course, with the benefit of a ‘Reader’ keeping the Contributors free from Editorial direction. Authors and contributions: Colonel David Bates ARRC - Global Health Security in the Age of CoViD -19; Professor John Ashton CBE - The Diary of a Plague; Major (Retired) Laura Morgan RAMC - The Civil-Military Perspective; Professor Maggie Rae CBE - Covid Reflections; Richard Shircore MSc FRSPH - An Alternative to Lockdown? Try a Different Paradigm; Iain Stainton, University of Cumbria Lecturer - Policing Covid; Ann Wylie FRSPH - Revising Health promotion courses linked to reflections from Covid-19.
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,019 | 0,005 |
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; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».