Reducing Social and Health Inequalities Requires Building Social and Political Movements
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
Health inequalities are an outcome of social inequalities and both result from the workings of the economic system, a governmental apparatus that maintains or reinforces these inequalities, and a public discourse that justifies these inequalities. The outcome of these processes is a skewed distribution of exposures among the population to various social (societal) determinants of health. Modifying these societal processes—thereby improving the social determinants of health—requires developing and implementing public policies consistent with reducing these inequalities. Two viewpoints dominate discussions of how this might be brought about: a) professionally-oriented rational or knowledge-based approaches and b) social and political movement-based materialist or political economy-oriented approaches. In political economies dominated by business interests such as those seen in Canada, the US, and UK, adopting a social and political movement-based approach is the most appropriate avenue of action. How this might be accomplished requires critical analysis of the political, economic, and social forces that lead jurisdictions to implement policies that either support or resist equity-oriented public policy innovations.
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 | 0.006 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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