Bibliographic record
Abstract
Health disparity in Canada is continuing to grow with marginalized communities being disproportionately affected. Policies and actions implemented by the federal government have been ineffective in addressing underlying causes of poor health. Framing access to justice as a social determinant of health is a necessary first step to establish a comprehensive and interdisciplinary approach to address poor health outcomes. Through an analysis of the limitations of access to justice as a legal term and the application of access to justice in health outcomes, this article hopes to foster further collaboration between the medical and legal communities in this area. art I of this paper argues the need to expand the scope of access to justice beyond the legal realm. Part II highlights the increasing health disparity within Canada and critiques the current approach. Part III outlines the ways in which health disparity can be improved if access to justice is recognized as a social determinant of health. The paper concludes with discussing progress that can be made in both the legal and medical community as a result of widening the scope of access to justice. Through an analysis of the limitations of access to justice as a legal term and the application of access to justice in health outcomes, this paper hopes to foster further collaboration between the medical and legal communities in this area.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".