MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2803557196 · doi:10.2166/wh.2018.009

Access to drinking water: time matters

2018· article· en· W2803557196 on OpenAlex
Alexandra Cassivi, Richard B. Johnston, E. Owen D. Waygood, Caetano C. Dorea

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Water and Health · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicChild Nutrition and Water Access
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalUniversity of Victoria
FundersWorld Health Organization
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceWater resource managementBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite the reported achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) with respect to drinking water, lack of access to water remains widespread worldwide. The indicator used there to measure access to water in the MDGs refers to the use of an improved water source. However, the amount of time spent in collecting water is high in countries where access to drinking water supplies located on premises is not common. 26.3% of the world's population did not have such access in 2015. Thus the need to travel to a water point, possibly queue, fill water containers, and carry them home is prevalent. The amount of time and effort used in water collection can be considerable, and household surveys increasingly provide data on collection time. This study aims to demonstrate the effect of adding a 30-minute collection time component to monitor access to drinking water. This study draws on household surveys from 17 countries to highlight the widespread burden of fetching water and its significant impact on estimates of coverage. The proportion of the population with access decreased by 13% on average for these 17 countries when collection time was added as a consideration.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.465
Threshold uncertainty score0.242

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.308 · 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