MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2015776479 · doi:10.1186/1472-6963-14-s1-i1

Uptake and impact of research for evidence-based practice: lessons from the Africa Health Systems Initiative Support to African Research Partnerships

2014· article· en· W2015776479 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Adrijana Corluka, Marc Cohen, Esmé Lanktree, Renée Larocque

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Health Services Research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Maternal and Child Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchInternational Development Research CentreGovernment of Canada
KeywordsHealth services researchGeneral partnershipHealth policyNursing researchHealth administrationGlobal healthPublic healthHealth informaticsKnowledge translationInternational developmentThematic analysisCapacity buildingImplementation researchHealth human resourcesPolitical scienceHealth equityEconomic growthMedicinePublic relationsHealth careQualitative researchNursingSociologyKnowledge managementEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2008, the Global Health Research Initiative (GHRI) invited applications from teams of researchers and decision-makers who were interested in conducting research related to human resources for health and the implementation and use of integrated health information systems in Africa, with special attention to equity considerations. These thematic areas constituted the focus of the Africa Health Systems Initiative - Support to African Research Partnerships (AHSI-RES) program. GHRI is a partnership of three Canadian agencies: Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Canada (DFATD), International Development Research Centre (IDRC), and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR). It is hosted at IDRC.

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)0.674
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.677
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.674
Threshold uncertainty score0.402

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.6740.677
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.003
Bibliometrics0.0090.009
Science and technology studies0.0120.041
Scholarly communication0.0470.060
Open science0.0110.059
Research integrity0.0210.026
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.466
GPT teacher head0.579
Teacher spread0.113 · 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.

Study designObservational
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

Citations17
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Health Services Research→Same topicGlobal Maternal and Child Health→French-language works237,207→