MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396771372 · doi:10.1002/puh2.185

COVAX and COVID‐19 Vaccine Inequity: A case study of G‐20 and African Union

2024· article· en· W4396771372 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePublic Health Challenges · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicPharmaceutical Economics and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of AlbertaCentre for Global Health Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakVirologyPolitical scienceMedicineInfectious disease (medical specialty)Internal medicineOutbreak

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the world has a history of vaccine nationalism, especially during the 2009 Swine flu pandemic, the COVAX alliance, a globally collaborated mechanism, was created by World Health Organization (WHO), GAVI, and UNICEF to address the inequity of COVID-19 vaccines. One of the primary aims of this alliance was to deliver vaccines to low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), which otherwise have less or no capacity to access vaccines from the open market. It is crucial to explore the contribution of COVAX in bridging the gap in equity, accessibility, and affordability of COVID-19 vaccines between high- and low-income countries (LICs). We selected Group 20 (G20) COVAX participants and the African Union (AU) as case studies to estimate these gaps. The bilateral purchase data shows that by December 2021, the G20 countries had vaccines more than double their population, whereas the AU could procure only about one fifth (19%) of their population. Out of 52 AU countries whose data was available, only 21 of them could strike a bilateral deal with vaccine manufacturers. Even after COVAX delivery, the share of the population that could be vaccinated in AU was just 36.8%, less than the target of WHO (40%) for December 2021. It was found that the COVAX alliance worked better than the open market competition for LMICs and LICs. The cost of vaccinating 20% of the population was 0.7% of the current health expenditure for G20 countries, whereas AU countries had to spend 5.5%. COVAX bears more cost (1%-3%) for AU countries than G20 countries (less than 1%). COVAX made COVID-19 vaccines more affordable and accessible to these countries. However, LICs were disproportionately affected even with the COVAX Facility mechanism owing to their lack of vaccine deployment infrastructure.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.954
Threshold uncertainty score0.641

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.311
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.082 · 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