The Historical Origins of Modern International Health
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Now that you have a sense of what constitutes the international health field and what are its principal goals and dilemmas, it is worth pausing to ask how concern with international health arose historically. Central issues include the following: what part was played by international (as opposed to local or national) factors in shaping patterns and perceptions of sickness and disease; how did these factors interact with the social experience of ill health; and how This chapter explores the main antecedents of modern international health, beginning with the 300-year-long waves of Eurasian plague. Next we examine the rise of imperialism and the slave trade and their health consequences. We then turn to the Industrial Revolution of the 19th century, the rise of the sanitary reform movement, and their implications for international health. We will also touch upon the so-called demographic and epidemiologic transitions and the constellation of factors that have led to the worldwide decline in mortality and increase in life expectancy over the past century. The ;nal section of the chapter traces the appear- ance and development of a new set of international health institutions—both inter- governmental and nongovernmental—from the mid-19th to the mid-20th centuries.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".