MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4407398220 · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5134325

When Health Data Go Dark: A Call to Restore DHS Program Funding

2025· preprint· en· W4407398220 on OpenAlexaff
Jessie Jane Khaki, Jil Molenaar, Sulata Karki, Emmanuel Olal, Manuela Straneo, Marie Alice Mosuse, Jovanny Tsuala Fouogue, Bernadette Hensen, Adama Baguiya, Angele Nkola Musau, Kerry LM Wong, Oumar Aly Ba, Amani Kikula, Fassou Mathias Grovogui, Aline Semaan, Anteneh Asefa, Peter M. Macharia, Chido Dziva Chikwari, Aliki Christou, Emelda A. Okiro, Martin Kavao, Abioye Amodu, Mwelwa Phiri, Athanase Rukundo, David Kitara, Onikepe Owolabi, Andrea B. Pembe, Bosede Bukola Afolabi, Lenka Beňová

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealthcare Policy and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.165
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.477
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.165
Threshold uncertainty score0.872

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1650.477
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.004
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0070.020
Scholarly communication0.0270.034
Open science0.0110.023
Research integrity0.0580.071
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0490.013

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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.244 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic Journal→Same topicHealthcare Policy and Management→French-language works237,207→