MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W155588357

Tackling Health Inequities in Rural Ukraine: Evidence-Based Approach

2014· article· en· W155588357 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Anna Vorobyova

Bibliographic record

VenueSummit (Simon Fraser University) · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Workforce Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceEconomic growthEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ukraine is experiencing an internationally recognized health crisis. Rural residents bear a disproportionate burden of this crisis due to challenging socioeconomic conditions in villages and disintegration of rural health care. Currently, Ukraine is piloting its first major health care reform, focused on changing the health care system from the patient-specialist to the primary care model. The reform has been critiqued for lack of attention to the social determinants of health and insufficient public consultation. Also, little is known from the Ukrainian rural population about their health concerns. This study attempts to bridge this knowledge gap in rural health policy in Ukraine. Fourteen interviews with health professionals and local representatives were conducted to identify the intermediate results of the pilot reform and barriers in accessing primary care in villages. The secondary analysis of five community consultations (funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, PI – Dr. Olena Hankivsky) presents a picture of health concerns in rural Ukraine. Together, these findings inform the final recommendation, which combines community-level health initiatives, the creation of the Rural Health Framework and reviving the profession of a feldsher (analogous to a nurse practitioner) in Ukraine.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.044
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.072
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.232

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0440.072
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.004
Bibliometrics0.0120.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.050
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.285 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSummit (Simon Fraser University)Same topicGlobal Health Workforce IssuesFrench-language works237,207