Assessing Factors Influencing Commitment to a Disparities Reduction Intervention: Social Justice Attitudes and Organizational Mission
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT: This mixed-methods study aims to understand what the perceptions of leaders and healthcare professionals are regarding causes of disparities, cultural competence, and motivation before launching a disparity reduction project in hypertension care, contrasting perceptions in Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs), and in a non-FQHC system. We interviewed leaders of six participating primary care systems and surveyed providers and staff. FQHC respondents reported more positive cultural competence attitudes and behavior, higher motivation to implement the project, and less concern about barriers to caring for disadvantaged patients than those in the non-FQHC practices; however, egalitarian beliefs were similar among all. Qualitative analysis suggested that the organizational missions of the FQHCs reflect their critical role in serving vulnerable populations. All system leaders were aware of the challenges of provider care to underserved groups, but comprehensive initiatives to address social determinants of health and improve cultural competence were still needed in both system types. The study provides insights into the perceptions and motivations of primary care organizational leaders and providers who are interested in improving chronic care. It also offers an example for care disparity programs to understand commitment and values of the participants for tailoring interventions and setting baseline for progress.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".