MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2518911850 · doi:10.1093/inthealth/ihw036

How can a Theory of Change framework be applied to short-term international volunteering?

2016· article· en· W2518911850 on OpenAlexaff
Bethina Loiseau, Benedict Darren, Rebekah Sibbald, Salem A. Raman, Lawrence C. Loh, Helen Dimaras

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Health · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTourism, Volunteerism, and Development
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesHospital for Sick ChildrenPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerm (time)Theory of changePublic relationsDeveloping countryLogic modelSocial changeBusinessEconomic growthPublic economicsEconomicsPolitical sciencePublic administrationManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Short-term international volunteering has become enormously popular among individuals from high-income countries who travel to low-income countries to offer support on initiatives often related to health and development. However, their impact on global development is questionable, particularly when volunteer skills are not matched to local needs, or when teams operate outside the local health system. Furthermore, the impact of these volunteer programs is rarely evaluated. Theory of Change is a framework for program design meant to facilitate measurable social change. We propose that a Theory of Change framework, appropriately deployed in the design and conduct of short-term international volunteerism, could help improve volunteer efforts by identifying problems and clearly defining goals, designing and implementing effective strategies, and evaluating the real impacts these have on identified concerns.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.773
Threshold uncertainty score0.477

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations5
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational HealthSame topicTourism, Volunteerism, and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207