Community-Based Health Financing: CARE India's Experience in the Maternal and Infant Survival Project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In a rural Indian population beset with inadequate health access due to socio-cultural and economic factors, CARE India under the Maternal and Infant Survival Project encouraged village women to form Community Based Organizations (CBOs) and to save health funds collectively. After 15 months of implementation, CBOs were formed in 345 of 447 project villages and health funds were operational in 203 villages. A total of 292 persons benefited from health funds through loans for treatment of obstetric complications and infant illnesses. Additional initiatives include social marketing, sales of disposable delivery kits, and village drug banks. Over half (56 percent) of the loans were repaid within the grace/low interest period. This experience demonstrates that village women, when appropriately encouraged, are capable of creating rules and managing health funds. The process empowers village women (through access to resources and information and the strength of social capital) to make decisions and act to improve their well being.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".