Social Inclusion: A Proposed Framework to Inform Policy and Service Outcomes Evaluation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Social inclusion is recognized as a fundamental right in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons With Disabilities (2006). Inclusion is also an explicit goal for community-based services in many countries. However, existing definitions of social inclusion are insufficient to support the development of policies and services, and the evaluation of their success in promoting social inclusion. Furthermore, existing definitions and measures tend to overlook the perspective of persons with disabilities and their significant others. Using a consensus building strategy, we developed a framework of social inclusion, which included the perspective of adults with intellectual disability. The proposed framework supports the development and evaluation of social inclusion policies and service outcomes.
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 | 0.301 | 0.194 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.029 | 0.018 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.021 | 0.026 |
| Open science | 0.010 | 0.023 |
| Research integrity | 0.012 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".