Tackling health inequalities : lessons from international experiences
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This book provides a unique perspective on health inequalities in Canada and elsewhere. This exciting new volume brings together experiences from seven wealthy developed nations -- the United States, Australia, Britain and Northern Ireland, Canada, Finland, Norway, and Sweden -- to analyse their contrasting approaches to reducing avoidable health problems. Some nations are successfully responding to health inequalities, but Canada is not one of them. Why is this, and what can we learn from other nations? Through a political economy lens, this book considers how societal structures and institutions shape the distribution of economic, political, and social resources that affect health disparities amongst the population. The volume then goes on to examine how governing authorities come to either confront or ignore these health inequalities and the conditions that create them. Through these illustrations, it encourages governing authorities that are tackling health inequalities to continue their efforts and directs those that are not -- such as in Canada and elsewhere -- towards what must be done. This ground-breaking text shows the primary lessons from these international experiences: that citizens in Canada and elsewhere need to educate themselves about the importance of tackling health inequalities, and then build the political and social movements that will compel governmental authorities to take action. This volume will serve as a rich resource for professionals and general readers interested in health studies, nursing, social work, public policy, and political economy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it