MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4378516114 · doi:10.1177/00333549231176285

Editors in Chief of <i>Public Health Reports</i> , 1878-2022: Men and Women Who Shaped the Discussion of Public Health Practice From 1918 Influenza to COVID-19

2023· article· en· W4378516114 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Noelle M. Harada, Andrey Kuzmichev, Hazel D. Dean

Bibliographic record

VenuePublic Health Reports · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPublic Health Policies and Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Department of Health and Human Services
KeywordsTimelinePublic healthQuarter (Canadian coin)MedicineGerontologyHistoryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: Public Health Reports ( PHR), the official journal of the Office of the US Surgeon General and US Public Health Service, is the oldest public health journal in the United States. Considering its heritage through the eyes of its past editors in chief (EICs), many of whom have been influential public health figures, can provide a fresh point of view on US public health history, of which the journal has been an integral part. Here, we reconstruct the timeline of past PHR EICs and identify women among them. Methods: We reconstructed the PHR EIC timeline by reviewing the journal’s previous mastheads and its articles describing leadership transitions. For each EIC, we identified dates in office, concurrent job titles, key contributions, and other important developments. Results: PHR had 25 EIC transitions in 109 years of its history, during which a single individual in charge of the journal could be identified. Only 5 identifiable EICs were women, who served as EIC for approximately one-quarter of the journal’s traceable history (28 of 109 years). PHR’s longest-serving EIC was a woman named Marian P. Tebben (1974-1994). Conclusions: PHR history revealed frequent EIC transitions and a low representation of women among its EICs. Mapping the timeline of past EICs of a historic public health journal can yield valuable insights into the workings of US public health, especially in the area of building a research evidence base.

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)0.090
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.044
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.424
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0900.044
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.007
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.149
GPT teacher head0.487
Teacher spread0.338 · 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
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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePublic Health ReportsSame topicPublic Health Policies and EducationFrench-language works237,207