Inclusion of Naturopaths in Northern Ontario Primary Care: A Proposed Solution for The Health Human Resources Shortage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The shortage of primary healthcare practitioners, such as physicians and nurses, in northern Ontario has persisted fordecades despite multiple strategies to address it. Poor health outcomes for people living in northern Ontario must be viewed through an equity lens that takes into account the multiple proximal, intermediate, and distal social determinants of health, including, but not limited to, the impact of colonization and continued colonialism on the health of Indigenous Peoples, challenges in housing, education and employment, as well as lack of food security. The increase in chronic health conditions in northern Ontario and the need for interprofessional healthcare teams that offer patient-centred care are key issues. Whole person care that takes into consideration the integration of body, mind, and spirit is central to Indigenous concepts of health and wellness, as well as being central to the foundations of naturopathic medical philosophy. Inclusion of naturopathic doctors in publicly funded multi-disciplinary primary healthcare settings is proposed as an achievable strategy to fill gaps in health human resources and advance the movement towards holistic care for Indigenous Peoples and others living in northern Ontario.
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 | 0.010 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.017 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| 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".