MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404562542 · doi:10.1093/isagsq/ksae083

The Politics of Public Health Emergencies of International Concern

2024· article· en· W4404562542 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

VenueGlobal Studies Quarterly · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal Security and Public Health
Canadian institutionsWiLAN (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsPublic healthPolitical sciencePublic administrationEnvironmental healthMedicineLawNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The declaration of a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) was created by the International Health Regulations (2005) and is WHO's highest level of alert for a health emergency. PHEICs are declared by the WHO Director-General on the basis of a recommendation provided by the International Health Regulations (IHR) Emergency Committee. This paper challenges the orthodox thinking around PHEIC declarations, using a methodological approach that has not been used in this space, through a series of interviews with those involved in the PHEIC declaration process. This paper provides vital insights into the PHEIC process, allowing us to fully understand what happens “in the room” during these deliberations, something which until now, has not been possible. We argue that the PHEIC declaration, and the Emergency Committee's role in this process, is not a politically neutral technocratic one, as is commonly claimed by WHO, but a highly politicized process that is driven by a range of factors beyond the criteria set down in IHR. We show that the PHEIC is informed by health surveillance practices that operate within the colonial construction of “global health security,” which is clearly embedded within every level of the PHEIC declaration process.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.825
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

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 studies0.0010.001
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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.313 · 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