Diversity and inclusion within an occupational therapy curriculum
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
Occupational therapy professionals and users of occupational therapy services are becoming increasingly aware of the issues of diversity encompassing their lived experiences, values and meaning systems. This paper situates a discussion of diversity and curriculum development in terms of inclusiveness of people's diverse lived experiences, which include complex combinations of ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, gender, socioeconomic status and other factors. A pedagogical context is provided based on understandings of culture, inclusiveness and diversity in the healthcare literature. The experience of one occupational therapy department's efforts to create a learning environment that is inclusive of all its participants is used to illustrate effective educational and structural strategies. Despite noble aspirations, much remains to be accomplished regarding how the profession defines competencies in terms of transcultural evaluation standards, outcomes and indicators.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.021 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it