MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3096130780 · doi:10.1016/s2542-5196(20)30247-3

Climate change: challenges and opportunities to scale up surgical, obstetric, and anaesthesia care globally

2020· review· en· W3096130780 on OpenAlexaff
Lina Roa, Lotta Velin, Jemesa Tudravu, Craig D. McClain, Aaron Bernstein, John G. Meara

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet Planetary Health · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate Change and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClimate changeScale (ratio)MedicineAdaptation (eye)Health careEnvironmental resource managementBusinessIntensive care medicineEnvironmental sciencePsychologyPolitical scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Climate change affects human health in a myriad of ways, requiring reassessment of the nature of scaling up care delivery and the effect that care delivery has on the environment. 5 billion people do not have access to safe and timely surgical care, and the quantity and severity of conditions that require surgical, obstetric, and anaesthesia care will increase substantially as a result of climate change. However, surgery is resource intensive and contributes substantially to greenhouse-gas emissions. In response to climate change, the surgical, obstetric, and anaesthesia community has a key role to play to ensure that a scale-up of service delivery incorporates mitigation and adaptation strategies. As countries scale up surgical care, understanding the implications of surgery on climate change and the implications of climate change on surgical care will be crucial in the development of health policies.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.003

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 head0.315
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.060 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations68
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Lancet Planetary HealthSame topicClimate Change and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207