L'humilité culturelle : Une façon de penser pour orienter la pratique à l'échelle mondiale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although we see evidence of cultural humility being practised with zeal in the global health communities of other professions, 8 there are few references in the physiotherapy literature, and this omission likely reflects a lack of uptake.With respect to global health involvement, we believe it is imperative that Canadian physiotherapists and students incorporate reflective practice premised on cultural humility for immediate impact.We have grounded this editorial in the field of global health both because it is what we know best and because we see the immediate advantages of adopting cultural humility in this domain.But this grounding carries the risk of perpetuating the notion of global health as something that happens over there, as somehow distinct from normal practice in Canada.In fact, however, we see cultural humility as a concept that is useful to guide respectful and effective practice not only abroad but also in contemporary Canada, with its exceptional diversity and its areas of tremendous inequality.We believe that exposure to this way of thinking should begin as early as entry-level education and that it should be increasingly incorporated into our professional ways of being and doing.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.025 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.071 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.020 | 0.020 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.016 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.020 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".