MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131365723 · doi:10.1177/1028315308329806

Building Global Health Research Competencies at the Undergraduate Level

2009· article· en· W2131365723 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jennifer Hatfield, Kent G. Hecker, Ashley Jensen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Studies in International Education · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Health and Surgery
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBachelorGlobal healthMedical educationHealth equityCapacity buildingPolitical scienceHealth carePublic relationsSociologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Faculty from the University of Calgary’s bachelor of health sciences (BHSc) Global Health Program argue for the development of global health research competencies to prepare students for international placements in low- and middle-income countries. These competencies include the ability to define and describe (a) how to use the concept of health research systems to investigate and describe health research activities in a given country, (b) the concept of health research capacity building, (c) the importance of building equitable and sustainable research partnerships, and (d) the role of knowledge mobilization and translation in health research. This article begins by outlining a rationale for preparing students for global health research activities and the BHSc Global Health Research Program. It then outlines these competencies and provides practical guidance to assist faculty and mentors preparing students for international placements. Finally, a case study of a student-led investigation of the health research system in Ethiopia is presented.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.005
Scholarly communication0.0090.004
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.004

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 head0.313
GPT teacher head0.569
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations8
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Studies in International EducationSame topicGlobal Health and SurgeryFrench-language works237,207