Critical Analysis of the Current Status of Transdisciplinary Research in Neonatology and Sustainable Development Goals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Neonatology, a discipline that deals with a variety of medical conditions such as prematurity, breathing, infections and birth defects, has seen rapid development and significant advancements during the past decades to ensure the survival and healthy life of newborns. Although the efforts of medical scientists following the multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary approaches have successfully reduced the neonatal mortality rate from about 5 million before 2000s to 2.3 million as of 2022, but stills challenges in understanding and addressing the complex neonatal health issues remain unsolved, which invites the necessity to apply complex and comprehensive transdisciplinary research approaches. Transdisciplinary research approaches are complex types of approaches applied for complex types of issues, engaging all stakeholders of society, so a holistic approach to understand the neonatal health, and the impacts of environmental, social, and biological factors should be studied. This article has shed light on the significance of transdisciplinarity which has proven its role in the development of a sustainable society and these holistic research approaches, can ensure meaningful results to reduce the mortality rate of newborns from 50% to 5%.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".