MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2921169433 · doi:10.1136/bmj.l1095

Protecting women and children in conflict settings

2019· editorial· en· W2921169433 on OpenAlexaff
Zulfiqar A Bhutta, Michelle F Gaffey, Karl Blanchet, Ron Waldman, Kamran Abbasi

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ · 2019
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth and Conflict Studies
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A recent Save the Children report highlighted that some 357 million children, one in every six children in the world, currently live in a conflict zone. 1 Almost half of them live in severe conflict settings. Wagner et al 2 estimate that a child born within 50 km of an armed conflict event in Africa has a 7.7% excess risk of dying in infancy. This equates to 5.2 more deaths per 1000 births than during periods without conflict in the same region (95% confidence interval 3.7 to 6.7). Predictably, this effect increases with severity of conflict.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
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 score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.004
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 head0.428
Teacher spread0.393 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations6
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJSame topicHealth and Conflict StudiesFrench-language works237,207