Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines the influence of traditional Chinese philosophy, in particular Neo-Confucianism, on our understanding of health, ill health and health care; and its role in contemporary physiotherapy practice in Hong Kong and China. Neo-Confucianism, a blend of Taoism and Buddhism with traditional Confucianism, has been a principal influence on the beliefs, attitudes and values of the Chinese people for 2,000 years. These philosophies are discussed in the context of the dominance and limitations of Western-based health care practice; the implications for Eastern-based health care practices; the contemporary definition of health by the World Health Organization; and health care trends and reform in Hong Kong. The practice of physiotherapy in Hong Kong provides a template for merging Eastern and Western philosophies in health care. Merging these philosophies reinforces the mind-body-spirit connection as a basis for understanding health and health care needs, and addresses the limitations of either philosophy individually in contemporary health care. Further, merging Eastern and Western philosophies provides a framework for the global advancement and development of physiotherapy practice, professional education and research.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".