MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2464092897

Global health and equity. Part 1: setting the context.

2005· article· en· W2464092897 on OpenAlexaff
Judy Mill, Barbara Astle, Linda Ogilvie, Mary Opare

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Health and Surgery
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHealth equityEquity (law)Global healthGlobalizationPhenomenonRelevance (law)PsychologyPolitical sciencePublic relationsNursingMedicinePublic healthEpistemology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Equity is considered one of the prerequisites and conditions for health. The pursuit of global health and equity is a relevant goal for nursing, based on the belief that health is a core phenomenon of interest to the discipline. In this article, the first in a two-part series, global health, equity and globalization are analysed. In addition, factors that contribute to global health inequity, including their relevance for nurses and nursing, are examined.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0050.015
Scholarly communication0.0080.009
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0070.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations6
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicGlobal Health and SurgeryFrench-language works237,207