MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3037651109 · doi:10.2196/20478

Public Health Strategies for the Gradual Lifting of the Public Sector Lockdown in Jordan and the United Arab Emirates During the COVID-19 Crisis

2020· article· en· W3037651109 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Raeda Al‐Qutob, Immanuel Azaad Moonesar, Mohammed Rasoul Tarawneh, Mohannad Al Nsour, Yousef Khader

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Public Health and Surveillance · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAlliance for Health Policy and Systems ResearchWorld Health Organization
KeywordsPreparednessPublic healthPandemicCrisis managementResilience (materials science)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Health carePsychological resiliencePublic sectorSurge CapacityBusinessEconomic growthPolitical scienceMedicineEconomicsDiseasePsychologyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this viewpoint, we present public policies and public health strategies for a gradual lockdown lifting during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) crisis in two country cases, Jordan and the United Arab Emirates. While managing pandemics is critical in terms of preparedness, response, and recovery, it is equally vital to ensure that the measures for a lockdown exit are both efficient and effective. It is critical to learn from first-wave lessons to systematize responses during times of crisis and execute appropriate public policies and public health strategies. This viewpoint highlights the importance of the following during lockdown lifting: pandemic control, health care capacity, training, scaling up of resources and systems, and priority setting of public policies by acknowledging challenges, developing policy insights, and setting the policy direction. The systematic approaches and leadership thinking required for lifting lockdowns during a crisis include the three Rs: Readiness, Responses, and Resilience & Recovery.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0020.012
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.322
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.089 · 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 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

Citations26
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Public Health and SurveillanceSame topicCOVID-19 epidemiological studiesFrench-language works237,207