Overview of the funding process.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<div> Increasing global inequities have led to ongoing critiques of both the historical roots and current practices in global health. From this literature, questions have emerged about the future of global health and Canada’s role in this future. However, there is little research exploring the role of Canadian policy for global health funding and the experience of stakeholders that currently implement projects with Canadian funding. This study explores stakeholder perspectives of how Canada’s Feminist International Assistance Policy (FIAP) influences adolescent sexual and reproductive health (ASRH) projects and how these perspectives align with calls for change in global health as proposed by Chidwick et al. in the conceptual framework for an imagined future for global health. This study was conducted from February to May 2023 through eight interviews with key informants who were working on ASRH projects, funded through Global Affairs Canada. The study approach included stakeholder analysis and qualitative description. Results highlight the role of Canadian organizations in ASRH projects, importance of partnerships, influence of the FIAP, operational and contextual tensions that arise from implementing FIAP values in ASRH projects outside of Canada, along with stakeholder views on moving forward in global health policy and practice. Findings indicate that the language of the FIAP is aligned with calls for change in global health although there is opportunity for further action towards operationalizing this change. Specifically, findings highlight opportunity to create more flexible funding processes, expand monitoring and evaluation approaches to better include feminist approaches, promote rights-based and dignity-based practices in ASRH, and increase timelines to facilitate greater consultation and partnership building with communities. In conclusion, the FIAP creates an impactful foundation for change towards equity and justice in ASRH projects, although Canadian funding structures and processes need to continue to re-imagine how they support organizations to action these changes. </div>
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.117 | 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".