MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3048739910 · doi:10.29173/hsi296

Reflecting on environment to understand diversifying health perspectives

2020· article· en· W3048739910 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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Science Inquiry · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicObesity and Health Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousComprehensionPublic healthSociologyPublic relationsEngineering ethicsPsychologyPolitical scienceMedicineEngineeringComputer scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

People hold health conceptions that are shaped by their environments. In Canada, these ideas and subsequent research approaches are often developed further through academic training. Current public health perspectives and approaches are largely focused on Western worldviews of health. I share my reflections on my environments, and continued journey as a student in academia that led me to question the current standard of teaching uniform health perspectives. Fostering a singular-worldview learning environment translate to future scholars missing opportunities to learn promising discourses – such as strength-based approaches – that may be more effective in application, including in Indigenous health research. I suggest ways in which environments that foster the appreciation and comprehension of diverse health perspectives can be built.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.489
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.003

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 head0.606
GPT teacher head0.596
Teacher spread0.011 · 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