MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Roads to Health in Developing Countries: Understanding the Intersection of Culture and Healing

2017· review· en· W2593551634 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Therapeutic Research · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural Competency in Health Care
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiomedicineHealth careDeveloping countryPopulationSociology of health and illnessMedicinePublic relationsPolitical scienceEconomic growthEnvironmental healthLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The most important attribute to which all human beings aspire is good health because it enables us to undertake different forms of activities of daily living. The emergence of scientific knowledge in Western societies has enabled scientists to explore and define several parameters of health by drawing boundaries around factors that are known to influence the attainment of good health. For example, the World Health Organization defined health by taking physical and psychological factors into consideration. Their definition of health also included a caveat that says, "not merely the absence of sickness." This definition has guided scientists and health care providers in the Western world in the development of health care programs in non-Western societies. OBJECTIVE: However, ethnomedical beliefs about the cause(s) of illness have given rise to alternative theories of health, sickness, and treatment approaches in the developing world. Thus, there is another side to the story. METHOD: Much of the population in developing countries lives in rural settings where the knowledge of health, sickness, and care has evolved over centuries of practice and experience. The definition of health in these settings tends to orient toward cultural beliefs, traditional practices, and social relationships. Invariably, whereas biomedicine is the dominant medical system in Western societies, traditional medicine-or ethnomedicine-is often the first port of call for patients in developing countries. RESULTS: The 2 medical systems represent, and are influenced by, the cultural environment in which they exist. On one hand, biomedicine is very effective in the treatment of objective, measurable disease conditions. On the other hand, ethnomedicine is effective in the management of illness conditions or the experience of disease states. Nevertheless, an attempt to supplant 1 system of care with another from a different cultural environment could pose enormous challenges in non-Western societies. CONCLUSION: In general, we, as human beings, are guided in our health care decisions by past experiences, family and friends, social networks, cultural beliefs, customs, tradition, professional knowledge, and intuition. No medical system has been shown to address all of these elements; hence, the need for collaboration, acceptance, and partnership between all systems of care in cultural communities. In developing countries, the roads to health are incomplete without an examination of the intersection of culture and healing. Perhaps mutual exclusiveness rather inclusiveness of these 2 dominant health systems is the greatest obstacle to health in developing countries.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.960
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.708
GPT teacher head0.623
Teacher spread0.085 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it