MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2615549739 · doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2017.04.056

Efforts to monitor Global progress on individual and community demand for immunization: Development of definitions and indicators for the Global Vaccine Action Plan Strategic Objective 2

2017· article· en· W2615549739 on OpenAlexaff
Benjamin Hickler, Noni E. MacDonald, Kamel Senouci, Holly B. Schuh

Bibliographic record

VenueVaccine · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicVaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityIzaak Walton Killam Health Centre
FundersWorld Health Organization
KeywordsImmunizationAction planVaccinationStrategic planningCollective actionBusinessAction (physics)Supply and demandWork (physics)Public relationsEconomicsMarketingMedicinePolitical scienceImmunologyPoliticsManagementMicroeconomicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Second Strategic Objective of the Global Vaccine Action Plan, "individuals and communities understand the value of vaccines and demand immunization as both their right and responsibility", differs from the other five in that it does not focus on supply-side aspects of immunization programs but rather on public demand for vaccines and immunization services. This commentary summarizes the work (literature review, consultations with experts, and with potential users) and findings of the UNICEF/World Health Organization Strategic Objective 2 informal Working Group on Vaccine Demand, which developed a definition for demand and indicators related to Strategic Objective 2. Demand for vaccines and vaccination is a complex concept that is not external to supply systems but rather encompasses the interaction between human behaviors and system structure and dynamics.

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)0.040
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.046
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.214

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0400.046
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.007
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations41
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVaccineSame topicVaccine Coverage and HesitancyFrench-language works237,207