Thinking about environment: incorporating geographies of disability into rehabilitation science
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
This paper concerns the introduction of geographical perspectives and concepts to health professionals in their analysis of disability or chronic illness. It focuses specifically on a course project, which drew on geographical literature and concepts from social theory in ‘mapping’ the daily routines of people with disability or chronic illness. It presents an analysis of the daily routines of a man with HIV/AIDS, showing the close and recursive interweaving of meanings of space and bodily inscription as a man under palliative care negotiates his body, neighbourhood and medical care. It describes his changing relationship to the spaces constituting his everyday life, and their renewed meaning as medical care becomes a more prominent theme in how such spaces are used. The relevance of this mapping of the chronically ill self into place and space to health professions is discussed through the particular lens of occupational therapy, which seeks to understand theoretically the inter‐linking of client behaviour and ‘environment’ and its implications for clinical reasoning.
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 | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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