MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2598364997 · doi:10.3138/cbmh.177-20042016

Chiropody/Podiatry: Interprovincial Differences in Profession Formation

2017· article· en· W2598364997 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Tracey L. Adams

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Health History · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal Disorders and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPodiatryPodiatristScope (computer science)Scope of practiceCentralityFoot (prosody)Health carePolitical scienceState (computer science)MedicinePublic relationsNursingAlternative medicineLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The regulation of foot health care professionals varies across provinces in Canada. In Ontario, the regulated health profession is chiropody. Chiropodists are foot specialists with a limited scope of practice. In contrast, British Columbia and five other provinces regulate podiatrists, who are highly trained foot physicians with an extensive scope of practice. This article explores the history of chiropody/podiatry in Ontario and British Columbia from the early 1900s through the 1980s in order to understand how professional development in this field took such divergent paths within Canada. In so doing, it not only sheds light on a health practice that has received little scholarly attention, but it also highlights the centrality of inter-professional conflict and state actors' agendas to professional regulatory 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.995
Threshold uncertainty score0.211

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Health HistorySame topicMusculoskeletal Disorders and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207