MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405713398 · doi:10.29173/hsi471

Evaluating limitations of current policies addressing climate change-induced food insecurity: A narrative review in the context of late menarche in African females

2022· review· en· W4405713398 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Amama Khairzad, Bilal Ahmad Khan, Sonia Sharma, Olivier Yong

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Science Inquiry · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural risk and resilience
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFood insecurityNarrativeContext (archaeology)MenarcheClimate changeNarrative reviewFood securityPolitical sciencePsychologyGeographySociologyEcologyBiologyDemographyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Menarche is a critical developmental milestone signalling the onset of female reproductive function. Food insecurity, induced by climate change, has contributed to irregularities in menarcheal age, which has been linked to potential harmful disease outcomes. Specifically, the incidence of a late menarcheal age has been observed in Africa. Various climate impacts, influenced by existing socio-economic conditions, cause Africa to be disproportionately impacted in the incidence of late menarche in adolescent females. This narrative review aimed to examine existing policies impacting health risks associated with late menarche, that are a consequence of climate change-induced food insecurity. Potential policy solutions included the utilization of renewable energy sources, climate-smart agriculture initiatives, and social cash transfer programs. These policies were appraised relative to the African context; barriers to successfully implementing these policies were found such as misalignment of governance objectives, limited financial evaluation, lack of contextual considerations during policy design, and the inability to foresee unintended consequences. These insights highlighted the importance of contextual factors, trade-offs, and contingencies when creating such policies and were used to inform suggested future directions for policy frameworks.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.806
GPT teacher head0.538
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Science InquirySame topicAgricultural risk and resilienceFrench-language works237,207