MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2999975142

An in-country model of workforce support for trained mid-level eye care workers in Papua New Guinea and Pacific Islands.

2017· article· en· W2999975142 on OpenAlexaff
Julie Brûlé, Benoît Tousignant, Graeme Nicholls, Matthew Pearce

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Workforce Issues
Canadian institutionsAssociation for Canadian StudiesUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkforceMedicineNew guineaEconomic shortageHuman resourcesBlindnessTraining (meteorology)OptometryNursingMedical educationGerontologyEconomic growthGovernment (linguistics)ManagementGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To alleviate the significant burden of vision impairment and blindness in low-resource settings, addressing the shortage in human resources in eye care is one of the fundamental strategies. With its postgraduate training programmes, The Fred Hollows Foundation New Zealand (FHFNZ) aims to increase workforce capacity in the Pacific Island countries and territories and Papua New Guinea. This paper presents an in-country model to offer support to graduates, an essential element to retain them in the workforce and ensure they are able to perform the tasks they were trained to do. FHFNZ has designed a workforce support programme employing a standardised process, allowing comparable reporting and providing data for FHFNZ to evaluate its training programmes, outputs as well as professional recognition and integration in the workplace.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.002

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 head0.105
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicGlobal Health Workforce IssuesFrench-language works237,207