Applications of Space Technologies to Global Health: Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Space technology has an impact on many domains of activity on earth, including in the field of global health. With the recent adoption of the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals that highlight the need for strengthening partnerships in different domains, it is useful to better characterize the relationship between space technology and global health. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to identify the applications of space technologies to global health, the key stakeholders in the field, as well as gaps and challenges. METHODS: We used a scoping review methodology, including a literature review and the involvement of stakeholders, via a brief self-administered, open-response questionnaire. A distinct search on several search engines was conducted for each of the four key technological domains that were previously identified by the UN Office for Outer Space Affairs' Expert Group on Space and Global Health (Domain A: remote sensing; Domain B: global navigation satellite systems; Domain C: satellite communication; and Domain D: human space flight). Themes in which space technologies are of benefit to global health were extracted. Key stakeholders, as well as gaps, challenges, and perspectives were identified. RESULTS: A total of 222 sources were included for Domain A, 82 sources for Domain B, 144 sources for Domain C, and 31 sources for Domain D. A total of 3 questionnaires out of 16 sent were answered. Global navigation satellite systems and geographic information systems are used for the study and forecasting of communicable and noncommunicable diseases; satellite communication and global navigation satellite systems for disaster response; satellite communication for telemedicine and tele-education; and global navigation satellite systems for autonomy improvement, access to health care, as well as for safe and efficient transportation. Various health research and technologies developed for inhabited space flights have been adapted for terrestrial use. CONCLUSIONS: Although numerous examples of space technology applications to global health exist, improved awareness, training, and collaboration of the research community is needed.
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 | 0.020 | 0.098 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.030 | 0.032 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
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".