MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3141831978 · doi:10.3138/cbmh.437-042020

The Proving Ground: Colombo Plan Fellowships and the Changing Landscape of Health Education in Canada, 1951–69

2021· article· en· W3141831978 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Jill Campbell-Miller

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Health History · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHistorical Psychiatry and Medical Practices
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoutheast asiaPlan (archaeology)Political scienceContext (archaeology)Economic growthHealth carePublic relationsGeographySociologyEthnologyLawArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines the history of the Colombo Plan fellowship program in Canada during the 1950s and 1960s. It will argue that this program had a visible impact on Canadian institutions of learning and health care for three reasons. First, it brought an unprecedented number of students and health care professionals from South and Southeast Asia to Canada; second, it fostered a sense of mission within Canadian institutions about the role education should play in contributing to health and international development overseas; and third, it revealed the challenges and tensions inherent in fulfilling this mission in the context of differences between the objectives of Canadian officials and those of the fellows themselves. With its focus on South and Southeast Asia, the Colombo Plan fellowship program anticipated broader trends regarding the international migration of health workers from that region in later years.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.821
Threshold uncertainty score0.952

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0290.016
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Health HistorySame topicHistorical Psychiatry and Medical PracticesFrench-language works237,207