Inclusion, diversity, equity, and accessibility: From organizational responsibility to leadership competency
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An awakening to systemic anti-Black racism, anti-Indigenous racism, and harmful colonial structures in the context of a pandemic has made health inequities and injustices impossible to ignore, and is driving healthcare organizations to establish and strengthen approaches to inclusion, diversity, equity, and accessibility (IDEA). Health research and care organizations, which are shaping the future of healthcare, have a responsibility to make IDEA central to their missions. Many organizations are taking concrete action critically important to embedding IDEA principles, but durable change will not be achieved until IDEA becomes a core leadership competency. Drawing from the literature and consultation with individuals recognized for excellence in IDEA-informed leadership, this study will help Canadian healthcare and health research leaders-particularly those without lived experience-understand what it means to embed IDEA within traditional leadership competencies and propose opportunities to achieve durable change by rethinking governance, mentorship, and performance management through an IDEA lens.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.021 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.049 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.015 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".