MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408839518 · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2025.1578964

Decolonizing global health research: experiences from the women in health and their economic, equity and livelihood statuses during emergency preparedness and response (WHEELER) study

2025· article· en· W4408839518 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Ahmed Adam, Lisa Lazarus, Bernadette Kina, Robert Lorway, Bilali Mazoya, Michaela Mantel, Marleen Temmerman, Lisa Avery, Evaline Lang’at

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Public Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicViral Infections and Outbreaks Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsCommunity-based participatory researchPublic relationsHealth equityPreparednessParticipatory action researchLivelihoodReciprocity (cultural anthropology)Equity (law)Global healthCitizen journalismSociologyPolitical scienceEconomic growthHealth careSocial scienceGeographyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Decolonizing global health research involves rethinking power structures and research collaboration to prioritize the voices and experiences of communities that have been historically marginalized. Cross-sectoral and cross-regional partnerships based on reciprocity, trust, and transparency can be facilitated by decolonized research frameworks. To address global health issues in a way that is inclusive, context-specific, and genuinely advantageous to all parties involved, especially communities most impacted by health disparities, the ethics behind this change is imperative. We applied a decolonizing health research approach to the Women in Health and their Economic, Equity, and Livelihood Statuses During Emergency Preparedness and Response (WHEELER) study to explore the connections between gender, health, and economic equity in times of crisis in two counties in Kenya. This paper outlines seven key dimensions that guided the WHEELER study in transforming power dynamics in research, decolonizing research processes, and fostering equitable partnerships. The study employed participatory methodologies, integrating the Equity in Partnership instrument from the Canadian Coalition for Global Health Research (CCGHR) Principles, human-centered design (HCD), and gender-based analysis to ensure inclusivity, gender sensitivity, and active participation. The participatory approach was implemented through the engagement of a Community Research Advisory Group (CRAG) and a Local Advisory Board (LAB). Utilizing mixed methods and community-engaged processes, the study fostered reciprocal growth, learning, and change among local health officials and research teams. Our participatory approach fostered strengthened engagement, promoted shared decision-making, and enhanced the sense of ownership among policy implementers throughout the research 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.

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)0.031
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.969
Threshold uncertainty score0.166

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0310.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0310.029
Scholarly communication0.0100.009
Open science0.0020.016
Research integrity0.0040.008
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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.329 · 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.

Study designQualitative
DomainMethods
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Public HealthSame topicViral Infections and Outbreaks ResearchFrench-language works237,207