MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138259968 · doi:10.1177/0020715214543158

Gendered vulnerabilities to a neglected disease: A comparative investigation of the effect of women’s legal economic rights and social status on malaria rates

2014· article· en· W2138259968 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kelly F. Austin, Mark Noble, Maria Theresa Mejia

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Comparative Sociology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Maternal and Child Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMalariaUnderdevelopmentInequalitySocial stratificationDevelopment economicsVulnerability (computing)Socioeconomic statusSocioeconomicsPandemicSocial inequalityEconomic growthPolitical scienceDiseaseDemographic economicsDemographyInfectious disease (medical specialty)SociologyEconomicsMedicinePopulationCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)ImmunologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although seldom noted in scholarly accounts, malaria represents a leading cause of death and underdevelopment in poor nations. Enormous cross-national variation in malaria rates across its endemic zones suggests the importance of large-scale factors in explaining comparative disease trends. While the biological vulnerability of women and children to malaria is often acknowledged, the literature has yet to investigate how gender inequalities contribute to patterns of malaria prevalence. Utilizing structural equation modeling on a sample of 90 less-developed nations and engaging insights from gender stratification perspectives, we consider the influence of both legal economic status and social dimensions of women’s status on malaria rates. We find that women’s legal economic status has an indirect relationship on malaria rates by enhancing women’s social standing and strengthening general health provisions. The results suggest that addressing issues of gender inequality in poor nations is central to tackling this persistent pandemic.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.315 · 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

Citations34
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Comparative SociologySame topicGlobal Maternal and Child HealthFrench-language works237,207