MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384655721 · doi:10.1136/bmjgh-2023-012615

An analysis of WHO’s Temporary Recommendations on international travel and trade measures during Public Health Emergencies of International Concern

2023· article· en· W4384655721 on OpenAlexafffund
Catherine Z Worsnop, Samuel Nass, Karen A. Grépin, Kelley Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Global Health · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsCLARITYPublic healthConsistency (knowledge bases)International Health RegulationsPandemicInternational communityGlobal healthBusinessInternational tradeMedicinePolitical scienceCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)LawNursingInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During Public Health Emergencies of International Concern (PHEICs), The International Health Regulations (IHR) require the WHO to issue Temporary Recommendations on the use of international travel and trade measures. During the COVID-19 pandemic, WHO's initial recommendation against 'any travel or trade restriction' has been questioned, and virtually all countries subsequently used international travel measures. WHO's Recommendations to States Parties also changed over the course of the pandemic. There is a need to understand how WHO's treatment of this issue compared with other PHEICs and why States Parties' actions diverged from WHO's initial Recommendations. This first analysis of WHO's Temporary Recommendations on international travel and trade measures during all seven PHEICs compares the guidance for clarity and consistency in several areas of substance and process. We find that lack of clarity and inconsistency in WHO guidance makes it difficult to interpret and relate back to IHR obligations. Based on this analysis, we offer recommendations to increase consistency and clarity of WHO's guidance on this issue during global health emergencies.

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)0.109
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.233
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.109
Threshold uncertainty score0.578

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1090.233
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0080.013
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
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 head0.475
GPT teacher head0.544
Teacher spread0.069 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations12
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Global HealthSame topicCOVID-19 epidemiological studiesFrench-language works237,207