MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104021977 · doi:10.1186/s40152-015-0020-2

Seafood insecurity, bush meat consumption, and public health emergency in West Africa: Did we miss the early warning signs of an Ebola epidemic?

2015· article· en· W2104021977 on OpenAlexafffund
Ahmed Khan, Sanie Sesay

Bibliographic record

VenueMAST. Maritime studies/Maritime studies · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicZoonotic diseases and public health
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaWellcome Trust
KeywordsPublic healthFood securityConsumption (sociology)Resilience (materials science)BusinessBushmeatWildlifeFood safetyClimate changeOutbreakPsychological resilienceEnvironmental healthEconomic growthGeographyEnvironmental planningEconomicsAgricultureMedicineEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, we frame issues around food security and the Ebola epidemic in West Africa and discuss the potential contribution of interrelated factors like seafood access, bush meat consumption, and public health concerns with the recent outbreak. Since seafood is a major dietary constituent in the affected countries, we posit that seafood unavailability due to unsustainable fishing practices and global change may increase the demand for bush meat and the risk of exposure to zoonosis such as Ebola through hunting and wildlife interactions. We discuss the potential contribution of these contextual drivers to public health within the wider milieu of changing climate, habitat disruptions, human migration and its implication for adaptive capacity, resilience and environmental governance. We conclude with policy options and research directives in addressing regional food security challenges, maritime policy, and emerging global health concerns.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.210
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.173 · 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 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

Citations13
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMAST. Maritime studies/Maritime studiesSame topicZoonotic diseases and public healthFrench-language works237,207