MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210465350 · doi:10.5539/gjhs.v14n3p20

Improving Global TBI Tracking and Prevention: An Environmental Science Approach

2022· article· en· W4210465350 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mara Chen, K. Maier, Donna Ritenour, Christina J. Sun

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Journal of Health Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTrauma and Emergency Care Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeospatial analysisOutreachPublic healthSocioeconomic statusGeographic information systemEnvironmental healthGlobal healthTracking (education)Global warmingEnvironmental dataPoison controlEnvironmental planningEnvironmental resource managementMedicineGeographyPsychologyEconomic growthClimate changePolitical sciencePathologyCartographyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) has grown to pandemic proportions, placing a significant burden on global public health, socio-economic condition, and human capital resources. This paper examines the global spatial distribution of TBI using currently available data from research studies to advance a comprehensive review of TBI that integrates geospatial and environmental perspectives. It reveals significant geographic differences and socioeconomic gaps in global TBI incidence tracking, prevalence, and mortality rates. It proposes an environmental science approach to improving public awareness, tracking and prevention of TBI through the integration of environmental data using GIS. The use of GIS for accurate location-based mapping and integrated analysis of environmental data subsequently helps reveal risk factors for targeted research, education outreach, and more effective public health policy and preventative measures.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0090.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.010
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.316 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Journal of Health ScienceSame topicTrauma and Emergency Care StudiesFrench-language works237,207