MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2890815842 · doi:10.1186/s12939-018-0844-7

Moving towards universal health coverage: engaging non-state providers

2018· editorial· en· W2890815842 on OpenAlexafffund
Zubin Cyrus Shroff, Krishna D. Rao, Sara Bennett, Ligia Paina, Marie‐Gloriose Ingabire, Abdul Ghaffar

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for Equity in Health · 2018
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Maternal and Child Health
Canadian institutionsInternational Development Research Centre
FundersAlliance for Health Policy and Systems ResearchWorld Health OrganizationInternational Development Research CentreRockefeller Foundation
KeywordsAllianceHealth services researchState (computer science)Public relationsSocial policyProcess (computing)Health policyPublic healthPolitical scienceEngineering ethicsMedicineComputer scienceNursingEngineeringLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This editorial provides an overview of the special issue "Moving towards UHC: engaging non-state providers". It begins by describing the rationale underlying the Alliance's choice of a research program addressing issues of non-state providers and briefly discusses the research process this entailed. This is followed by a summary of the findings and key messages of each of the eight articles included in the issue. The editorial concludes with a series of reflections regarding lessons learnt about the engagement of non-state providers, methodological challenges, areas for future research as well as the contribution of the research program towards efforts to build capacity and strengthen health systems towards universal health coverage.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.055
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.055
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.005
Scholarly communication0.0120.008
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0150.022
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.395 · 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
GenreEditorial

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

Citations13
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal for Equity in HealthSame topicGlobal Maternal and Child HealthFrench-language works237,207