COVID-19 Pandemic Planning and Preparedness for Institutions Serving People Living With Disabilities in South Africa: An Opportunity For Continued Service and Food Security
Bibliographic record
Abstract
On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization declared the COVID-19 outbreak as pandemic just about three months after its emergence in December 2019 in Wuhan, China. The outbreak of COVID-19 launched the world into a public health crisis, impacting families, schools, and communities in unprecedented ways. This paper examines the existence of pandemic planning and preparedness for institutions serving PLWD in order to ensure continued service for its users. The research also analyses the considerations applied to address the challenges that a pandemic will present. This study comes at an opportune moment when institutions serving PLWD become overwhelmed and face possible closure of their facilities. As COVID-19 continues to have wide-reaching impacts across the globe, it is important to understand how persons with disabilities are uniquely impacted by the pandemic, including health, education, and food security. Method: A qualitative study was considered complemented by telephone interviews in two facilities (Evaton and Katlehong) serving PLWD were used as a case study. Results: The paper concludes that adequate pandemic planning and preparedness in response to COVID-19 are critical to saving both lives and livelihoods and continuous service delivery. The respondents articulated a need for inclusive strategies where disabled people are involved as consultants and partners, not just as users. Conclusion: Diligent planning was found to be essential. The results highlight the role of the institutions serving PLWD in being effective and supporting service delivery and food security.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".