Improving Maternal, Newborn and Women’s Reproductive Health in Crisis Settings: A Cochrane Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: While emergency preparedness is a core public health function in Canada, public health emergency preparedness activities operate largely in the background until an event of concern raises their profile, as was observed during the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) outbreak and recently, with Ebola Virus Disease.Despite the lessons learned from SARS, a persistent challenge for public health practitioners is defining what it means to be prepared for the Canadian public health system.Methods: This research used a qualitative study design.Six focus groups were conducted across Canada, employing the Structured Interview Matrix technique.The purposive sample consisted of inter-disciplinary professionals with roles in or relevant to public health emergency preparedness.Rich qualitative data was analyzed using content analysis.Emergent themes were identified by incorporating empirical data from each phase of the Structured Interview Matrix.Integrated knowledge translation was incorporated throughout the study design and involved knowledge users in study design and analysis.Results: will be presented for the essential elements of public health emergency preparedness across all-hazards emergencies.Emergent themes include the consideration of structures important to preparedness for emergencies, and the processes and resources found to be essential to preparedness in Canada.Detailed examination of elements will explore practice and experience; collaboration; communication; learning and recovery; and ethical considerations in planning and decisionmaking. Conclusion:This study presents findings on the essential elements of public health emergency preparedness in Canada.These elements can guide practice in informing preparedness activities.Countries with health systems similar to Canada may use the findings in conceptualizing preparedness within public health systems globally.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".