Scoping Review of the Occupational Health and Safety Governance in Sudan: The Story So Far
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The reoccurrence of occupational accidents in Sudan is evidence of a lack of effective Occupational Health and Safety (OSH) governance in Sudan. Methods: This scope review research articles on OSH governance in Sudan from different sources, including international websites, official government websites, original research articles in journals, and various reports. The five stages of the scoping review followed in this study are: identifying the research question; identifying relevant studies; study selection; charting the data; collating, summarizing, and reporting the results. Results: There is numerous legislation in place; however, there is no evidence of their enforcement, and no formal bodies at the national level are identified as being responsible for their enforcement. Conclusion: Having multiple authorities with overlapping responsibilities hinders OSH governance. An integrated governance model is proposed to eliminate overlapping duties and to facilitate the participation of all stakeholders in the governance process.
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.
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 | 0.010 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it