MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Rural Health Care Access and Policy in Developing Countries

2015· review· en· W2122088182 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

VenueAnnual Review of Public Health · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Workforce Issues
Canadian institutionsLaurentian UniversityNOSM University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHealth careDeveloping countryHealth policyHealth equityLife expectancyEquity (law)Rural areaWorkforceEconomic growthBusinessRural healthHRHISInternational healthHealth educationMedicineEnvironmental healthNursingPolitical sciencePopulationEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Compared to their urban counterparts, rural and remote inhabitants experience lower life expectancy and poorer health status. Nowhere is the worldwide shortage of health professionals more pronounced than in rural areas of developing countries. Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) includes a disproportionately large number of developing countries; therefore, this article explores SSA in depth as an example. Using the conceptual framework of access to primary health care, sustainable rural health service models, rural health workforce supply, and policy implications, this article presents a review of the academic and gray literature as the basis for recommendations designed to achieve greater health equity. An alternative international standard for health professional education is recommended. Decision makers should draw upon the expertise of communities to identify community-specific health priorities and should build capacity to enable the recruitment and training of local students from underserviced areas to deliver quality health care in rural community settings.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.563
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.207
GPT teacher head0.592
Teacher spread0.385 · 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