MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2943604673 · doi:10.1089/heq.2019.0008

Walking the Walk: The Case for Internal Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Work Within the Canadian Public Health Sector

2019· article· en· W2943604673 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Equity · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPublic Health Policies and Education
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEquity (law)WorkforcePublic relationsDiversity (politics)Health equityPublic healthBusinessInclusion (mineral)Work (physics)Public economicsEconomic growthPolitical scienceSociologyMedicineEconomicsNursingEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Equity is fundamental to public health practice. However, limited work has evaluated public health units, as employers, in ensuring equitable workplaces. Public health units must examine their policies for promoting equity, diversity, and inclusiveness. We suggest strategies that these organizations may adopt to establish a diverse workforce, including programs of responsibility, broader advertisement of employment opportunities, and standardized application processes. These practices are site dependent and are more effective when supported by senior management. By considering these strategies, institutions of public health can improve equity, diversity, and inclusion in their workplaces while addressing health equity in the communities they serve.

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)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Open science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.612
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0660.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.018
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.247
GPT teacher head0.490
Teacher spread0.243 · 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