MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409883378 · doi:10.26685/urncst.897

INNOVATX Global Health Case Competition 2025 – Presented by McMaster Friends of Médecins Sans Frontières

2025· article· en· W4409883378 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Aaliya Saquib, Jacqueline Chen, Arya Ebadi, Simrit Sekhon

Bibliographic record

VenueUndergraduate Research in Natural and Clinical Science and Technology (URNCST) Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBiomedical Ethics and Regulation
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersMcMaster University
KeywordsCompetition (biology)Environmental healthPolitical scienceMedicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

McMaster Friends of MSF (FoMSF) is a student-led club at McMaster University that supports Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) Canada, a humanitarian relief-based organization that helps countries across the world. McMaster FoMSF organized the INNOVATX Global Health Case Competition to provide undergraduate students with the chance to problem-solve, enrich their skills, and above all, gain valuable exposure to current global health contexts. This year’s competition focused on food insecurity in Yemen, and participants were asked to describe one health issue related to the topic and propose a plan on how MSF can better address this issue. After a round of written submissions and another round of live presentations, the briefing notes from the three winning teams have been published in this conference book. To learn more about McMaster FoMSF or the INNOVATX Global Health Case Competition, please visit our Instagram (@mac_fomsf) page. Disclaimer: The views expressed throughout this case competition and publication are solely those of the INNOVATX participants and do not reflect those of McMaster FoMSF, MSF Canada, McMaster University, or any other organization.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.086
Threshold uncertainty score0.287

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0060.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0860.012

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.469
Teacher spread0.422 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUndergraduate Research in Natural and Clinical Science and Technology (URNCST) JournalSame topicBiomedical Ethics and RegulationFrench-language works237,207