MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016478645 · doi:10.1080/17441690903418977

‘Sustainability’ in global health

2010· article· en· W2016478645 on OpenAlex

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Public Health · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicGlobal Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainabilityPsychological interventionPublic healthPublic relationsHealth careBusinessEconomic growthPolitical scienceMedicineNursingEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

'Sustainability' has become a central criterion used by funders - including foundations, governmental agencies and international agencies - in evaluating public health programmes. The criterion became important as a result of frustration with discontinuities in the provision of care. As a result of its application, projects that involve building infrastructure, training or relatively narrow objectives tend to receive support. In this article, we argue for a reconceptualisation of sustainability criteria in light of the idea that health is an investment that is itself sustaining and sustainable, and for the abandonment of conceptualisations of sustainability that focus on the consumable medical interventions required to achieve health. The implication is a tailoring of the time horizon for creating value that reflects the challenges of achieving health in a community. We also argue that funders and coordinating bodies, rather than the specialised health providers that they support, are best positioned to develop integrated programmes of medical interventions to achieve truly sustainable health outcomes.

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.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.637
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.329 · 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