MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4318159272 · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(23)00130-7

Health in global biodiversity governance: what is next?

2023· article· en· W4318159272 on OpenAlexaff
Liz Willetts, Liane Comeau, Neil M. Vora, Ojistoh Horn, Marie Studer, Keith Martin, Melissa Lem, Claudel Pétrin-Desrosiers, Liz Grant, Kinari Webb

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicZoonotic diseases and public health
Canadian institutionsCanadian Association of Emergency PhysiciansInternational Society for Equity in HealthInternational Institute for Sustainable Development
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlobal healthScopusPublic healthPolitical scienceConvention on Biological DiversityCivil societySafeguardingPublic relationsHealth careMedicineBiodiversityMEDLINEPoliticsEcologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.042
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.222

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0420.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0070.033
Scholarly communication0.0340.055
Open science0.0040.017
Research integrity0.0480.042
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0270.004

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.283 · 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
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

Citations19
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueThe LancetSame topicZoonotic diseases and public healthFrench-language works237,207