MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386415842 · doi:10.1136/bmjgh-2023-012827

Smart investment in global childcare requires local solutions and a coordinated research agenda

2023· article· en· W4386415842 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Alex Aliga, Tefera Darge Delbiso, Patricia Kitsao-Wekulo, Monica Lambon‐Quayefio, Rachel Moussié, Amber Peterman, Natan Tilahun

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Global Health · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPoverty, Education, and Child Welfare
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAfrican Population and Health Research CenterAddis Ababa UniversityInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsInvestment (military)Economic growthPolitical scienceBusinessPublic economicsPublic relationsPublic administrationEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

⇒ The COVID-19 pandemic has re-emphasised the critical role of accessible, affordable and quality childcare to reduce and redistribute the gender unequal distribution of unpaid care work as an investment towards the well-being of children, women, families and society.⇒ Smart investment in childcare and care systems in Africa requires context-specific and culturally appropriate local solutions driven by national stakeholders-including commitment by national governments to resource and build systems of public provision.⇒ These investments must be guided and matched by nationally led evidence generation to fill research gaps and contribute to a coordinated agenda on childcare.⇒ We propose four themes to build the foundation of a regional research agenda: (1) understanding the landscape of childcare coverage and demand; (2) unpacking 'what works' for whom over time; (3) building knowledge on implementation of scalable and locally adapted solutions and (4) answering macro-questions on policy, financing, systems and sustainability.⇒ Coordinated national-led investment in childcare is needed in the Africa region and beyond-however, this alone is not a silver bullet and must be part of a larger effort to address structural barriers and catalyse systematic change across sectors to promote women's social and economic empowerment.

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)0.035
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.044
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.184

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0350.044
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0050.011
Scholarly communication0.0240.023
Open science0.0050.026
Research integrity0.0210.027
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0390.006

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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.472
Teacher spread0.363 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Global HealthSame topicPoverty, Education, and Child WelfareFrench-language works237,207