MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Utilization of Emergency Management and Research Institute (108 EMRI): An Emergency Response Service in Khammam District, Andhra Pradesh, India

2011· article· en· W2769372599 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Chandrasekhar Reddy Bolla, Shankar Reddy Dudala, Anita Rao, Sashidhar Bandaru, Manoj B. Patki, Baer P Ravi Kumar

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Human Ecology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDisaster Response and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAssociated Medical Services
KeywordsGeneral partnershipContext (archaeology)Medical emergencyMedicineService (business)BusinessGeographyFinanceMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Emergency Management and Research Institute (EMRI) operates 1-0-8, 24X7 emergency service for medical, police and fire emergencies in India. Born in the context of the ineffective co-ordination among multiple emergency response systems, it was introduced on 15th of August 2005, with a fleet of 652 ambulances within the state of Andhra Pradesh (AP) as a Public Private Partnership. Objectives of this work were to study the utilization pattern of 108-EMRI services in Khammam district of AP, the demographic profile of the beneficiaries and the types of emergency services provided by 108-EMRI, using data provided by the District Coordinator of 108-EMRI. Secondary data was taken from the District Coordinator of 108-EMRI for a period of one year (June 2008 to May 2009). A total of 60,898 beneficiaries had availed the108-EMRI services in the four divisions of Khammam district. Among the beneficiaries, majority were pregnancy related (17.9%), followed by RTA (Road Traffic Accidents) (13.8%), suicides (6.7%) and cardiac emergencies (3.9%). EMRI is undoubtedly operationally effective system in reaching out to those who are in need. To its credit goes the achievement of bringing Emergency medical response on to the agenda of the nation.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.306
GPT teacher head0.501
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Human EcologySame topicDisaster Response and ManagementFrench-language works237,207