MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3133090431 · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(21)00388-3

Priorities for the COVID-19 pandemic at the start of 2021: statement of the Lancet COVID-19 Commission

2021· article· en· W3133090431 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jeffrey D. Sachs, Salim S. Abdool Karim, Lara B. Aknin, Joseph R. Allen, Kirsten Brosbøl, Gabriela Cuevas Barron, Peter Daszak, María Fernanda Espinosa, Ví­tor Gaspar, Alejandro Gaviría, Andy Haines, Peter J. Hotez, Phoebe Koundouri, Felipe Larraín B., Jong‐Koo Lee, Muhammad Ali Pate, Paul Polman, Gabriela Ramos, K. Srinath Reddy, Ismail Serageldin, Rajiv Shah, John Thwaites, Vaira Vīķe-Freiberga, Chen Wang, Miriam Were, Lan Xue, Min Zhu, María Elena Bottazzi, Francesca Colombo, George Laryea-Adjei, Yanis Ben Amor, Özge Karadağ Çaman, Guillaume Lafortune, Emma Torres, Ismini Ethridge, Juliana G E Bartels

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersOrganisation de Coopération et de Développement ÉconomiquesSeoul National UniversityPontificia Universidad Católica de ChileTsinghua UniversityEuropean Association of Environmental and Resource EconomistsMailman School of Public Health, Columbia UniversityChinese Academy of Medical SciencesSimon Fraser UniversityCenters for Disease Control and PreventionUNICEFPublic Health Foundation of IndiaKorea Centers for Disease Control and PreventionEcoHealth AlliancePeking Union Medical CollegeAthens University of Economics and Business
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)CommissionPandemic2019-20 coronavirus outbreakEuropean unionEuropean commissionSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Political scienceDeclarationDebtBusinessEconomic growthVirologyMedicineFinanceInternational tradeEconomicsLawInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.714
Threshold uncertainty score0.983

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.508
GPT teacher head0.484
Teacher spread0.025 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations31
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueThe LancetSame topicCOVID-19 epidemiological studiesFrench-language works237,207