MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410764717 · doi:10.1080/17441692.2025.2504698

Challenges implementing technology transfer as a viable pathway for equitable vaccine production and access: A case study of the mRNA vaccine hub in South Africa

2025· article· en· W4410764717 on OpenAlexafffund
Omowamiwa Kolawole, Caroline B. Ncube, Jeremy de Beer

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Public Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInnovation and Socioeconomic Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
FundersNew Frontiers InitiativeUniversity of JohannesburgInternational Development Research CentreAmerican University in CairoGovernment of CanadaAmerican UniversitySocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Cape TownNational Research FoundationUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsTechnology transferProduction (economics)BusinessDeveloping countryVirologyEconomic growthMedicineInternational tradeEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the face of the COVID-19 pandemic, there have been renewed calls for more equitable vaccine access. These calls have in turn resulted in interventions to increase vaccine manufacturing capacity as one of the key interventions to address global vaccine access. However, skill gaps in manufacturing capacity point out the critical need for technology transfer and more open science. The World Health Organization-instituted mRNA hub in South Africa has been positioned as an initiative to facilitate technology transfer for building and leveraging vaccine manufacturing capacity in low and middle income countries. Our case study examines the activities of the mRNA vaccine hub, highlighting challenges that can stifle the long-term goals of equitable vaccine production if left unaddressed. The findings suggest that for technology transfer to be effective, there must be sufficient institutional commitment, adequate funding that is fit for purpose, clear terms and an enabling legal and socio-economic environment.

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 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.639
Threshold uncertainty score0.432

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Public HealthSame topicInnovation and Socioeconomic DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207