MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2594310443

EcoHealth approach to control of zoonotic emerging infectious diseases in Southeast Asia: Sharing the experiences

2013· article· en· W2594310443 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jeff Gilbert

Bibliographic record

VenueCGSPace A Repository of Agricultural Research Outputs (Consultative Group for International Agricultural Research) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicZoonotic diseases and public health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoutheast asiaZoonotic diseaseGeographyOne HealthEmerging infectious diseaseEnvironmental healthEnvironmental planningVirologyOutbreakPublic healthMedicineDiseaseHistoryEthnology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The International Livestock Research Institute was established in 1994 through a merger of two livestock research centres belonging the Consultative Group on International Agriculture Research, leading to an expanded mandate. ILRI’s predecessors started out with a geographical focus on East Africa but expanded to other regions: including Southeast Asia. Always keen to test a novel approach, researchers learned of the EcoHealth approach that had been pioneered in Latin America and submitted a proposal entitled an ‘Ecosystem Approaches to the Better Management of Zoonotic Emerging Infectious Diseases in SE Asia’ was accepted for funding by the International Development Research Centre (IDRC, Canada). ILRI’s role throughout the project is a mentoring one. After identifying partners from various disciplines, research teams were formed and requested to reach an internal consensus of what zoonosis(-es) they would research. All EcoZD teams successfully devised their own research proposals. To measure incorporation of EcoHealth into research - outcome mapping and ‘EcoHealth Uptake’ were used. EcoHealth resource centres were also established. All teams have presented their research at international conferences and are expected to publish in peer-reviewed journals as well as local language ones. They have already or are preparing to feedback results to the communities where data was collected and engage with policy-makers. A number of these outputs will provide excellent reference case studies for other EcoHealth initiatives The challenges were many however: scope and ‘loose’ definitions of EcoHealth make it challenging to teach as a standard. In terms of building capacity a larger than anticipated effort was required to develop ‘intra-disciplinary’ skills such as proposal writing study design and analysis. EcoZD will be able to provide evidence that researchers can collaborate and produce research, policy and dissemination outputs.

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)0.015
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.005
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0010.014
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCGSPace A Repository of Agricultural Research Outputs (Consultative Group for International Agricultural Research)→Same topicZoonotic diseases and public health→French-language works237,207→