Social Accountability and Accreditation: Impacting Health System Performance and Population Health
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Today’s reality all over the world has shown a huge disparity in the quality, equity, relevance, partnership and efficiency in the provision of health services resulting in huge gap of health status in many societies across the globe, be it in the developed and the developing countries. A number of reasons have been discussed. One most important reason is the disconnected between medical schools and health profession education institutions with their ecosystem and community they are mandated to serve. The concept of social accountability endorsed by the WHO since 1995 has not really been embraced by medical and health profession education institutions and not yet supported by key policy makers and health managers in many regions and countries. A few case studies have proved that the concept of social accountability is feasible and managable; and it eventually brings beneficial impact for the society in improving the health status. Existing guidelines and approaches could be used to accelerate the adoption of social accountability as long as key actors from international, national, institution and community levels are orchestrated congruently. A new paradigm in school’s accreditation embracing social accountability concept could reinforce this venture.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".