MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3216490355 · doi:10.1080/14616742.2021.1997150

The end of the maternal health moment: an examination of Canada’s evolving global reproductive policy commitments

2021· article· en· W3216490355 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Candace Johnson

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Feminist Journal of Politics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Care Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsReproductive healthPolitical scienceMoment (physics)SociologyDemographyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Global maternal, newborn, and child health (MNCH) policy has been in ascendancy over the past ten years. It is an issue that at one time struggled to garner the attention of governments and donors, but then became a “cause célèbre,” evidenced by showpiece policies that committed billions of dollars to improving the health of mothers and infants worldwide. At the same time, the status of the maternal subject, as a social and political figure in the Global North, and as a global health policy subject, has been in decline. In this article, I explain the Canadian government’s evolving commitments to this policy domain and posit that the global maternal health moment might be coming to an end. I argue that while the shift from MNCH to sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) expands the (feminist) focus of previous MNCH commitments, recent Canadian government initiatives are unsuccessful in addressing human rights goals, contradict the partnership model of development that implements policy and fosters relationships with communities, fail to meet the requirements of gender justice at both global and local/contextualized levels, and threaten to further diminish the political authority of the maternal subject.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.345
Threshold uncertainty score0.759

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.007
Science and technology studies0.0420.015
Scholarly communication0.0140.002
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.393 · 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
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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Feminist Journal of PoliticsSame topicGlobal Health Care IssuesFrench-language works237,207