Health Service Delivery in the Humanitarian-Development-Peace Nexus: Envisioning the Role of International Organizations in Rebuilding Fragmented Health Systems in the Post-conflict Peacebuilding Process
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The delivery of health services in conflict-affected states has significant implications for the health and security of communities. However, little evidence regarding the process of rebuilding health systems in the humanitarian context exists. This novel review of the reconstruction process at the Humanitarian-Development-Peace Nexus presents two chapters analyzing the theory and practice of health service delivery in the post-conflict transition. First, a narrative review finds the international community’s process shifts donor-funded health services to state-planned health systems as state institutions stabilize through novel financing and governing mechanisms. Second, a scoping review of post-conflict Essential Packages of Health Services (EPHS) interventions finds significant variations in benefit packages, financing schemes, and government control over contracting mechanisms. Cross-sectoral priorities identified for delivering EPHS interventions post-conflict include stabilizing security from attacks, improving access to financial resources, and mitigating gender disparities. Recommendations call for additional evaluations of EPHS to build evidence supporting peace-responsive health systems.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".