MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963659906 · doi:10.7189/jogh.09.020101

Lessons from the integrated community case management (iCCM) Rapid Access Expansion Program

2019· editorial· en· W2963659906 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Salim Sadruddin, Franco Pagnoni, Gunther Baugh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Global Health · 2019
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Maternal and Child Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersWorld Health Organization
KeywordsMalariaReferralGovernment (linguistics)DocumentationCase managementScale (ratio)MedicineCommunity health workersEnvironmental healthFamily medicineNursingHealth servicesGeographyComputer sciencePopulationImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2012, the Government of Canada awarded a grant to the World Health Organization's Global Malaria Programme (GMP) to support the scale-up of integrated community case management (iCCM) of pneumonia, diarrhoea and malaria among children under 5 in sub-Saharan Africa under the Rapid Access Expansion Programme (RAcE). The two main objectives of the programme were to: (1) Contribute to the reduction of child mortality due to malaria, pneumonia and diarrhoea by increasing access to diagnostics, treatment and referral services, and (1) Stimulate policy updates in participating countries and catalyze scale-up of integrated community case management (iCCM) through documentation and dissemination of best practices. Based on the results of the implementation research and programmatic lessons, this collection provides evidence on impact and improving coverage of iCCM in routine health systems, and opportunities and challenges of implementing and sustaining delivery of iCCM at scale.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.066
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.095

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.066
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0090.016
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.386 · 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

Citations11
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Global HealthSame topicGlobal Maternal and Child HealthFrench-language works237,207