MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3138365210 · doi:10.1177/17579759211000975

‘Back to better’: amplifying health equity, and determinants of health perspectives during the COVID-19 pandemic

2021· article· en· W3138365210 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

VenueGlobal Health Promotion · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCommunity Health and Development
Canadian institutionsNova Scotia Health Authority
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPandemicSocial determinants of healthHealth equityPreparednessHealth promotionEquity (law)Political scienceCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Health policyPoliticsSocial justicePublic relationsGlobal healthEconomic growthSociologyHealth careMedicineCriminologyDiseaseEconomicsInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Equity and social justice have long been key tenets of health promotion practice, policy and research. Health promotion foregrounds the pertinence of social, economic, cultural, political and spiritual life in creating and maintaining health. This necessitates a critical structural determinants of health perspective that actively engages with the experiences of health and wellbeing among diverse peoples. The inequitable impacts of pandemics are well documented, as are calls for improved pandemic responses. Yet, current pandemic and emergency preparedness plans do not adequately account for the social and structural determinants of health and health equity. METHODS: Through five one-hour online conversations held in April 2020, we engaged 13 practice, policy, research and community leaders on the intersections of COVID-19 and gender, racism, homelessness, Indigenous health and knowledge, household food insecurity, disability, ethics and equitable futures post-COVID-19. We conducted a thematic analysis of speaker and participant contributions to investigate the impacts and influence of COVID-19 related to the structural and social determinants of health. We analyzed which policies, practices and responses amplified or undermined equity and social justice and identified opportunities for improved action. FINDINGS: Analysis of the COVID-19 pandemic revealed four broad themes:• oppressive, unjust systems and existing health and social inequities;• health and social systems under duress and non-responsive to equity;• disproportionate impacts of COVID-19 driven by underlying structural and socioeconomic inequity; and• enhanced momentum for collective mobilization, policy innovations and social transformation. DISCUSSION: There was a strong desire for a more just and equitable society in a post-COVID-19 world, going 'back to better' rather than 'back to normal.' Our analysis demonstrates that equity has not been well integrated into pandemic planning and responses. Social movement and systems theories provide insight on ways to build on existing community mobilization and policy openings for sustained social transformation.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.181
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.264
GPT teacher head0.556
Teacher spread0.293 · 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