MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2542842645

Intersectoral Involvement in Water Sanitation Innovations

2015· article· en· W2542842645 on OpenAlexaff
Alix Thompson

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Health: Annual Review · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicChild Nutrition and Water Access
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSanitationEnvironmental planningRainwater harvestingImproved sanitationBusinessOpen defecationMillennium Development GoalsEconomic growthNatural resource economicsGeographyDeveloping countryEconomicsEnvironmental engineeringEnvironmental scienceEcology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Diarrheal diseases result in the death of over one million children annually, more than AIDS, malaria and measles combined (2). Poor water management and sanitation are at the root of this serious global health issue, requiring intersectoral involvement to establish and implement efficient water management and sanitation strategies. Simple yet effective water and sanitation innovations such as rainwater harvesting and ecological sanitation are available, however many people continue to lack access to safe water and are far behind the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) target for water and sanitation(1,2). This paper analyzes the importance of intersectoral involvement and the interaction between technology and policy in successful technology transfer, with a focus on rural Zambia. Using a socio-ecological framework, this analysis focuses on the interaction between environmental subsystems and the economic, social, and political factors affecting new technology implementation. The issues with assuming that new water sanitation innovations will be universally applicable are discussed in relation to past difficulties with transferability.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.335 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Health: Annual ReviewSame topicChild Nutrition and Water AccessFrench-language works237,207