MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2977791285

G7 and G20 Commitments on Health

2019· article· en· W2977791285 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueOpenDocs (Institute of Development Studies) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicGlobal Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of TorontoDepartment for International DevelopmentGovernment of the United Kingdom
KeywordsPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There are four health issues that have received the most consistent attention in G7 and G20 summit declarations, having been addressed in more than half of the summits since 2015 and appearing in 30 or more commitments over that time. Those issues are health systems strengthening, infectious diseases (including HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria, polio, neglected tropical diseases, and vaccination), antimicrobial resistance (AMR) and public health crises. Other issues highlighted in at least half of the summits include the importance of the One Health approach and multisectoral working (particularly in the context of combating antimicrobial resistance), research and development (in the context of work on infectious diseases and antimicrobial resistance), and universal health coverage. G7 and G20 summit declarations have tended to neglect non-communicable diseases, environmental pollution, tobacco control, substance abuse, road traffic morbidity and mortality, access to essential medicines via the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), and social issues such as equity and the social determinants of health (Kirton & Bracht, 2015; McBride et al., 2019). G7 health commitments are closely aligned with Sustainable Development Goal 3, with commitments corresponding to 24 out of the 28 targets and principles in SDG 3. The G20’s commitments on health are less well aligned to SDG 3, matching only 14 of the 28 targets and principles (McBride et al., 2019). Some authors have criticised G7 and G20 health commitments for not being specific or measurable enough to hold member states to account effectively (Kirton & Bracht, 2015; Horton, 2017; McBride et al., 2019). The G7 and G20 both refer to inclusiveness in the form of supporting work towards universal health coverage, although this is more prevalent for the G7 than for the G20. The G7 included specific references to women’s and girls’ health among their commitments, while no specific references to gender were noted in G20 health-related commitments. No specific references to disability were observed in the summit documents reviewed for this report.

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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.212
Threshold uncertainty score0.740

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.272 · 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