Engaging with the water sector for public health benefits: waterborne pathogens and diseases in developed countries
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An editorial published in the Bulletin of the World Health Organization in 2008 argued for stronger engagement between the health and water sectors, commenting “a public health perspective in water management provides opportunities to both improve population health and reduce costs.” When viewed from a public health perspective, water is typically considered in terms of drinking, bathing and waste disposal but other activities, particularly food production, inshore fisheries and recreation, form important points of human contact. The water sector is diverse, comprising environmental sciences, engineering, the water supply industry, regulatory authorities and government policy-makers. A new level of engagement to involve the water sector in public health objectives is therefore dependent upon establishing a basis for dialogue and collaboration between these stakeholders, who bring widely differing conceptual approaches and practical concerns. In support of this aim, we present here a perspective on waterborne pathogens and diseases from a multidisciplinary expert group from the environmental science, microbiology, water industry, regulatory and health protection communities in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it