Enhancing Response Ability: Dietetics as a Vehicle for Social Justice—A Primer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent world events have shone a spotlight on the social and structural injustices that impact the lives, health, and well-being of individuals and communities under threat. Dietitians should be well positioned to play a role in redressing injustice through their individual and collective "response abilities", that is, the combination of responsibility for and ability to be responsive to such injustices due to the varying privilege and power that dietitians have. However, recent research shows that dietitians report a lack of knowledge, skill, and confidence to take on such roles, and that dietetic education includes little knowledge- or skill-based learning that might prepare dietitians to do so. This primer aims to introduce readers to concepts that are fundamental to socially just dietetics practice, including privilege, structural competence, critical reflexivity, critical humility, and critical praxis. We assert that when implemented into practice and used to inform advocacy and activism these concepts enhance dietitians' individual and collective response ability to redress injustice.
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 | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".