International Research Partnerships in Occupational Therapy: A Canadian–Zambian Case Study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The country of Zambia's Sixth National Development Plan includes many objectives related to participation and health that align with values underlying occupational therapy. Given this link, occupational therapy research has the potential to advance the Sixth National Development Plan and thereby enhance the participation and health of Zambians. However, there is neither a school of occupational therapy nor many occupational therapists working in Zambia. Using an example of a global research partnership between Canadian occupational therapy researchers and Zambian researchers, this paper examines the partnership using four criteria for global health research in order to derive lessons for future occupational therapy research partnerships. Implications for future occupational therapy research partnerships include the need for partners to combine their complementary skills and knowledge so that they may collaborate in mutually beneficial ways to address global health challenges and expand the reach of occupational therapy perspectives.
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.
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 | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.043 | 0.004 |
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 it