MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4327637185 · doi:10.1017/9781580466646.002

A Match Made in Heaven?

2006· other· en· W4327637185 on OpenAlexaff
Anne‐Emanuelle Birn

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicGlobal Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic healthState (computer science)Political scienceGovernment (linguistics)PoliticsPublic administrationEconomic growthLawMedicineEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Public health, foreign capital, social revolution, modern state-building: perhaps nowhere did these forces so vividly coalesce, captivate, and challenge one another than in the interactions between the Rockefeller Foundation and Mexico. For the RF, public health represented an appealing sphere of action for its domestic and international philanthropic investments, one that—consistent with its motto—could widely benefit mankind. For Mexico, public health offered a concrete, feasible area through which the state could enlarge its authority by meeting revolutionary expectations for improved social conditions, build a sense of citizenship—particularly among rural populations—and tether science and scientific professionals to renewed national goals. Beyond this shared attraction to public health, bringing together Mexico's revolutionary state and Rockefeller dollars through cooperative health activities required mutual confidence. As a civilian stand-in for U.S. foreign development policy, the RF was well attuned to Mexico's role as trade partner, investment locale, and source of laborers and well aware of its bitterness toward repeated U.S. aggressions. The RF agreed that public health could help in the building of modern Mexico, with diplomatic by-products of reduced political, social, and disease threats to the U.S. and much-needed binational goodwill. If Mexico could trust the RF's professed independence from the U.S. government, the International Health Board's (IHB) ability to support—and perhaps accelerate—Mexico’s public health modernization made it a potentially palatable associate. During the first half of the twentieth century, no agency was as far-reaching or as active in promoting international public health as the RF. Virtually every facet of public health's early twentieth-century revolution—the scientific breakthroughs in bacteriology and parasitology; the advances in epidemiology and vital statistics; the training of professionals; the awakening of public health consciousness; the building of institutions; the application of these developments to the health of populations around the world; and the very model of scientific public health—involved the foundation in some dimension. The Rockefeller family, the foundation trustees, and powerful foundation administrators and officers were in a position to channel Rockefeller capital to a bewildering array of activities, but they also recognized that public health was not always an end in itself. While RF projects were narrowly focused, the RF's executives understood the attendant value of international public health in improving productivity and fomenting economic development, stabilizing social and political conditions, protecting trade, and enabling countries to enter into the global capitalist system.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.083

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.023
Scholarly communication0.0110.022
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0080.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.003

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.260 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGlobal Public Health Policies and Epidemiology→French-language works237,207→