MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2908322318

Evaluating the Women Health Volunteers Program in Iran- a Quarter Century Experience (1992-2016).

2018· article· en· W2908322318 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Behzad Damari, Sahand Riazi-Isfahani

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Maternal and Child Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStrengths and weaknessesGovernment (linguistics)Program evaluationPublic relationsSustainabilityMedical educationHealth literacyMedicineQuarter (Canadian coin)Political scienceBusinessEnvironmental healthPsychologyHealth carePublic administration
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Running for more than 25 years, the Women Health Volunteers (WHV) program in Iran has made many great achievements. Considering the new expectations from the health system, this national program needs to be revised and undergo fundamental changes. Although many studies have been conducted to evaluate this program, there still is a lack of a comprehensive nationwide assessment containing policy recommendations. METHODS: This study was conducted in a qualitative approach. The data were obtained from 3 sources: national documentations, semi-structured questionnaires by 49 key informants, and focused group discussions. The program was assessed in 4 domains including the program, goals, achievements, improved opportunities (weaknesses), and strategies for improvements. RESULTS: The collected data were categorized into 4 main themes including goals and objectives, achievements, weaknesses, and recommendations. Main achievements of the WHV program are: increasing people's participation especially women, increasing health literacy, and increasing coverage and utilization of health services. The most important weaknesses of the program include: lack of a national roadmap and policy plan for the WHV program, lack of true belief in people's participation in policymakers, weakness in comprehensive system monitoring and evaluation, and inadequate funding. CONCLUSION: Like many other health system programs in the country, the WHV program suffers from the lack of a binding strategic plan and goal so that by changes in management, sustainability of the program becomes hampered. An appropriate solution would be to operate the WHV program like a non-government organization (NGO) under the supervision of the Ministry of Health and Medical Education (MoHME).

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.113

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.312 · 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

Citations10
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicGlobal Maternal and Child Health→French-language works237,207→