MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3009718031 · doi:10.7189/jogh.10.010901

Effective approaches to public engagement with global health topics

2020· review· en· W3009718031 on OpenAlex
Iain H. Campbell, Igor Rudan

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Global Health · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMisinformation and Its Impacts
Canadian institutionsCentre for Global Health Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic healthPublic engagementPublic relationsGlobal healthCommunity engagementSocial mediaHealth communicationHealth promotionPolitical scienceMass mediaSociologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: "Public engagement" in science is a term that covers a broad spectrum of activities undertaken by the scientific community. The precise definitions are constantly evolving to incorporate new means of engagement, facilitated by emerging technologies. Global health research is amenable to community engagement and popularization, but it is difficult to know which strategies work best to attract considerable attention from the public. METHODS: This is a review of the articles and documents that address the question of public engagement with topics in medical sciences, particularly in global health. Semantic searches were conducted using Google Scholar rather than indexed databases due to poor indexing of the topic. More than 1000 titles were screened and 48 articles were retained as most useful. It then moves to a more specific topic of the online public engagement in global health. RESULTS: The review presents the attempts to define public engagement in science and its general importance, particularly in the field of global health. Examples of the latter include tobacco use, vaccination, and maternal and child health. In reviewing effective approaches to public engagement in global health through online video campaigns, it studies the examples of crowdfunding, USAID's First Public Engagement Campaign, World Health Organization's Social Media Campaigns and the impact of Global Health Media Project. CONCLUSIONS: This review reveals three key gaps in the understanding of determinants of effective online public engagement in global health. The mixed results of traditional mass media campaigns in global health emphasise the calls for more research on message content. A framework for effective message content would help in both raising awareness of key issues and creating behaviour change in the general public. Moreover, it is surprising to find no formal research on what constitutes effective video content in global health. Finally, few studies considered important metrics to track in social media campaigns. There is a clear need to investigate which video features are effective in global health online public engagement. Success will be defined through key video marketing metrics and tracked in order to isolate effective content features.

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)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.971
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.258
GPT teacher head0.471
Teacher spread0.212 · 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