Bibliographic record
Abstract
This submission provides an important historical context for understanding the current challenge facing the Orthotic and Prosthetic community in Alberta including Alberta Aids to Daily Living (AADL), Suppliers, and Providers: maintaining sustainable access to Orthotic care for people with mobility disorders in the face of declining real rates of reimbursement combined with increasing costs and a shortage of skilled Clinicians. Under the Canada Health Act, the federal government delegates responsibility for providing health care to the provinces. This delegation of responsibility to the provinces results in a degree of variability of funding of Orthotics and Prosthetics between provinces across the country. Funding of Orthotics and Prosthetics in Alberta is characterized by structural inequities that favour Prosthetics at the expense of Orthotics. To the extent that the structural inequities that exist in Alberta are related to governance by volunteer-run, non-profit organizations, they may be generalized to the Canadian experience. Finally, in a Call to Action a number of recommendations are made to address the challenge of sustainable access to Orthotic care in Alberta serving as a model for other provinces across Canada. Article PDF Link: https://jps.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/cpoj/article/view/35876/28314 How To Cite: Schneider N. Evolving business models in orthotics. Canadian Prosthetics & Orthotics Journal. 2021; Volume 4, Issue 2, No.3. https://doi.org/10.33137/cpoj.v4i2.35876 Corresponding Author: Nancy SchneiderBraceworks Custom Orthotics, 1-3500 24 Ave NW, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.E-Mail: nancy@braceworks.caORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8441-4467
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 | 0.018 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.031 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.003 |
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.
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".