MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041825281 · doi:10.1080/17441692.2012.733950

Framing and global health governance: Key findings

2012· article· en· W2041825281 on OpenAlexaff
Colin McInnes, Kelley Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Public Health · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal Security and Public Health
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFraming (construction)RealmConfusionPolitical scienceCorporate governancePublic relationsSociologyPsychologyBusinessGeographyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite widespread agreement that collective action to address shared health challenges across countries is desirable and necessary, the realm of global health governance has remained highly problematic. A key reason for this is the manner in which health issues are presented ('framed'). Because multiple frames are operating simultaneously, confusion and a range of competing policy recommendations and priorities result. Drawing on the previous articles published in this Special Supplement, these key findings explore how health issues are framed, what makes a framing successful, what frames are used for and what effects framing has.

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)0.041
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.130
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.217

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0410.130
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.009
Science and technology studies0.0030.010
Scholarly communication0.0100.021
Open science0.0020.009
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.001

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.331 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations35
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Public HealthSame topicGlobal Security and Public HealthFrench-language works237,207