MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2995369948 · doi:10.1080/08865655.2019.1700823

Syndemics in Symbiotic Cities: Pathogenic Policy and the Production of Health Inequity Across Borders

2019· article· en· W2995369948 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Carina Heckert

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Borderlands Studies · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMigration, Health and Trauma
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of General Medical Sciences
KeywordsSyndemicPublic healthHealth policyHealth equitySocial determinants of healthDevelopment economicsContext (archaeology)Public policyPolitical scienceVulnerability (computing)Economic growthSociologyHealth careEconomicsGeographyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Public health in border regions is a central concern to researchers and policymakers. This article demonstrates how and why syndemics theory should be central to border health research agendas and the development of health policy. A syndemic describes the concentration and deleterious interaction of two or more health conditions in a population. However, syndemic theory is not only about disease pathology. Another central tenant of syndemic theory is that the sociopolitical and environmental context facilitates the interaction of multiple health conditions. Within the social sciences and public health, a syndemics approach has become an increasingly utilized framework for understanding health disparities. However, how this framework can be adapted to understand the particularities of border regions remains underdeveloped. In applying syndemics to border regions, this paper explores how border-related policies produce conditions that facilitate syndemic vulnerability. In doing so, this article focuses on four policy realms as they unfold on the US-Mexico border: immigration policy, the War on Drugs, environmental policy, and health policy. The construction of policies within these realms often ignores the ways policies produced in one nation generate health consequences beyond national boundaries.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.179
Threshold uncertainty score0.289

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.359 · 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.

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

Citations6
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Borderlands StudiesSame topicMigration, Health and TraumaFrench-language works237,207