Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This edited volume treats policy as an ethnographic object. Examining both policy spaces and sites of practice, the chapters illuminate both professionals’ and lay people’s intimate encounters with health policies. By ‘studying up’ and considering the multiplicity of actors and interests involved in global policies for improving maternal and reproductive health, the ten chapters in this volume track the processes and politics of policymaking and the mechanisms of their implementation in diverse contexts in Asia, Africa, Europe and South America. The chapters provide in-depth analyses of the complexities of policy formulation and implementation, the impact of socio-political contexts, as well as issues of local agency, equity and accessibility. Together, they demonstrate the value of ethnography as well as reproduction as a unique site for the generation of rich insights into the working of global health policies and their impacts. Such critical social science research is increasingly recognised as a crucial part of the evidentiary basis upon which people-centred and equitable health policy and systems everywhere are built. This volume will be of interest to scholars working at the intersection of critical global health, medical anthropology, and health policy and systems research, as well as to global public health practitioners.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 teacher head, 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".