MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2466228677 · doi:10.22215/cjcr.v1i1.11

A rights and equity-based Platform and Action Cycle to advance child health and well-being by fulfilling the rights of children

2014· article· en· W2466228677 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Ilaria Simonelli, Raúl Mercer, Andrew Clarke, Ana Isabel Fernandes Guerreiro, Kjersti J. Ø. Fløtten, Stefania Maggi, J. E. M. Robinson, Fabrizio Simonelli, Ziba Vaghri, Elspeth Webb, Jeffrey Goldhagen

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Children s Rights / Revue canadienne des droits des enfants · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicChild and Adolescent Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaCarleton UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
FundersHelsedirektoratetAkershus UniversitetssykehusNSW Ministry of HealthUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsConvention on the Rights of the ChildEquity (law)Human rightsRight to healthPolitical sciencePublic relationsAction (physics)Engineering ethicsLawEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Think and Action Tank (TAT) on Children’s Rights to Health was established in 2013 as an international network of child health advocates. The TAT’s mission is, “To develop, implement, evaluate, and disseminate rights and equity-based strategies, models, and tools to advance children’s health and well-being by fulfilling their rights.” Toward this end, the TAT has developed a conceptual and operational framework to support a human and child rights-based approach to health; and a Platform and Action Cycle (PAC) as a strategy and tool to translate the principles of human and child rights-based approaches to health into practice. The PAC consists of three action steps—contextualizing, assessing, and improving. Through a structured process of generating rights and equity-based statements, indicators, and reports, the PAC establishes a mechanism to engage multi-disciplinary professionals and children themselves in efforts to realize the vision of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.

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)0.077
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.044
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score0.409

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0770.044
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.020
Scholarly communication0.0130.016
Open science0.0040.023
Research integrity0.0060.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations4
Published2014
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Children s Rights / Revue canadienne des droits des enfantsSame topicChild and Adolescent HealthFrench-language works237,207