MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010351977 · doi:10.1093/phe/php027

'Cholera and Nothing More'

2009· article· en· W2010351977 on OpenAlex
Michael Hunt

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenuePublic Health Ethics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth and Conflict Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversité de Montréal
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsBioethicsPublic relationsHealth careContext (archaeology)Political scienceSociologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In situations of conflict, environmental disaster or outbreak of infectious disease, local and national agencies may be unable to adequately respond to the needs of affected populations and individuals. In many locales around the world, international non-governmental organizations (NGOs) provide assistance during acute or protracted crises, and participate in post-crisis recovery and rehabilitation. National and expatriate staff of relief organizations work in varying degrees of partnership with local agencies and other humanitarian actors to address a wide range of needs including health care, nutrition, safe water, sanitation and shelter. Health professionals play key roles in these interventions. This field of health care practice presents distinct practical and ethical challenges for clinicians. As in the case ‘Cholera and Nothing More’ presented by Delan Devakumar, health-related humanitarian projects are often characterized by features such as the prominence of public health concerns, narrow organizational remit and program mandates, widespread limitations of material and human resources, obstacles to creating collaborations among disparate actors, and the cross-cultural and trans-national nature of the care context. These characteristics contribute to the challenge of identifying, and acting upon, parameters of ethically sound health care practice. While there has been some recent discussion of this topic from a bioethics perspective (Eckenwiler, 2003; Benatar, 2006; Fuller, 2006; Macklin, 2006; Sommers-Flanagan, 2007) there is need to further expand and develop bioethics analysis of this field of health care practice (Wikler and Brock, 2007). An inherent challenge of analyzing ethical issues associated with humanitarian work is the complexity, and often instability, of the local health, social and political systems in the settings where these activities take place.

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.

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Commentary
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablelow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Commentary
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Qualitativelow
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.967
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.486
GPT teacher head0.584
Teacher spread0.098 · 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