Integrating social justice advocacy into a family health team
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PROBLEM ADDRESSED: Health is largely determined by socioeconomic factors. Health care providers can potentially address these factors through social justice advocacy. However, many individual providers and teams have not taken on this role in Canada. OBJECTIVE OF PROGRAM: To address identified barriers in integrating social justice advocacy into the practice of individual health care providers and interdisciplinary teams. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: An Advocacy Tool Kit was created in 2017 to build individual capacity for social justice advocacy. An advocacy framework was adopted in 2018 that reiterated the commitment of the Department of Family and Community Medicine at St Michael's Hospital in Toronto, Ont, to social justice advocacy and outlined 2 new processes: to adopt and implement specific departmentwide campaigns to advocate for social justice; and to respond to inquiries about social justice issues and external advocacy campaigns. CONCLUSION: The initiatives have helped integrate social justice advocacy into the core activities of the interdisciplinary primary care team and can likely be replicated by other interested groups across the country.
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 | 0.030 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.029 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.022 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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".