MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4282006331 · doi:10.1016/j.ssaho.2022.100298

Back to the future: Covid-19 and the recurring debate over social determinants of disease, and health

2022· review· en· W4282006331 on OpenAlexaff
Tom Koch

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial Sciences & Humanities Open · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)DiseaseSocial determinants of healthPandemicVirologyPolitical scienceMedicineInfectious disease (medical specialty)Health careOutbreakLawPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the 1980s, a large literature has developed on the social determinants of health, primarily non-communicable diseases for which mortality and morbidity can be shown to change across a socioeconomic gradient. Primarily regional or national in focus, they are joined, today, with an increasing focus on international health and the effect of inequalities between nations effect disease generation and spread. Similar and earlier literatures first considered socioeconomic factors influencing disease incidence and intensity primarily at local and regional levels. One such literature was primarily "sanitarian," focusing on general infrastructure needs (safe water, for example) to create a beter health environment. A second, primarily nineteenth century literature focused on social inequalities and the epidemic diseases in specific populations. This paper seeks to review these separate foci and then combine them into a more comprehensive understanding of both the general and specific determinants of health and disease at local, national, and international scales of address. It notes that while disease dynamics have been long known that current literatures typically consider socioeconomic determinants at local, national, and global scales as a new phenomenon.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.915
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0180.004
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.300
GPT teacher head0.509
Teacher spread0.209 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial Sciences & Humanities OpenSame topicHealth disparities and outcomesFrench-language works237,207