MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3028997472 · doi:10.1186/s12939-020-01198-0

COVID-19 and informal settlements: an urgent call to rethink urban governance

2020· letter· en· W3028997472 on OpenAlexaff
Sara Van Belle, Clara Affun‐Adegbulu, Werner Soors, Prashanth Nuggehalli Srinivas, Guillermo Hegel, Wim Van Damme, Deepika Saluja, Ibukun‐Oluwa Omolade Abejirinde, Edwin Wouters, Caroline Masquillier, Hanani Tabana, Faustin Chenge, Katja Polman, Bruno Marchal

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for Equity in Health · 2020
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban and Rural Development Challenges
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationCentre for Global Health ResearchHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial policyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Corporate governancePublic healthHuman settlementInformal settlementsHealth services research2019-20 coronavirus outbreakHealth policySevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Healthcare policyPolitical sciencePublic administrationHealth care reformEconomic growthBusinessMedicineVirologyGeographyEconomicsNursingFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While some countries are nearing or reaching their peak of coronavirus infections, others are only at what seems to be the early stages of the infection curve. Some of these countries, particularly in the Global South, contain some of the world’s largest informal and/or urban settlements and are low resource settings. Given that the last few months have shown us how quickly COVID-19 can push health systems to the brink or overwhelm them, even in high-income countries, it is worrying to think what would happen if the outbreak becomes severe in such contexts.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0100.013
Scholarly communication0.0070.014
Open science0.0030.009
Research integrity0.0570.062
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.003

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 head0.166
GPT teacher head0.467
Teacher spread0.301 · 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

Citations45
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal for Equity in HealthSame topicUrban and Rural Development ChallengesFrench-language works237,207