Social and Structural Determinants of Health: Exploring Occupational Therapy's Structural (In)competence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: In high-income countries, such as Canada, 50% of health outcomes are attributable to social determinants. Occupational opportunities are also structurally determined, yet these inequities are obscured by the White, Western assumptions and ableist neoliberal ideology in which the profession is deeply rooted. Purpose. To highlight the impact of structural injustices and other social determinants of health and occupation; explore the occupational therapy profession's structural competence; and build on existing knowledge to advance an agenda for action on injustice and inequity for the occupational therapy profession. Key issues. Occupational therapy's failure to prioritize education, research and action on systemic injustices and other social determinants of health and occupation reflects a lack of commitment to achieving the World Federation of Occupational Therapists' Minimal Standards. Implications. If occupational therapy is to advance knowledge and practices that address inequities in the social and structural determinants of health and occupation, we must strive towards structural competence.
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 | 0.006 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".