MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6887694897 · doi:10.17605/osf.io/ptb9w

An umbrella review protocol of the evidence syntheses to inform vaccination practices and policies against COVID-19 pandemic in Africa

2022· other· en· W6887694897 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Science Framework · 2022
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVaccinationPandemicProtocol (science)Quarter (Canadian coin)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Public health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Africa, the rollout of COVID-19 vaccines is slower than in high income settings. Furthermore, in Africa, the rollout started in the first quarter of 2021 compared with earlier periods (December 2020 and January 2021) in high income settings. Optimal COVID-19 vaccination rollout in Africa should be guided by context-specific and up to date available evidence. We conducted an umbrella review to identify, analyze and characterize the evidence synthesis that is available and has the potential to inform COVID-19 vaccination practices and policies in Africa.

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)0.204
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.268
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.204
Threshold uncertainty score0.981

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2040.268
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.011
Bibliometrics0.0220.022
Science and technology studies0.0070.005
Scholarly communication0.0140.009
Open science0.0060.009
Research integrity0.0140.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0850.020

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 head0.220
GPT teacher head0.507
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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 venueOpen Science FrameworkFrench-language works237,207