Physiotherapy’s necessity for ableism: reifying normal through difference
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although critical disability studies has become more widely recognized within physiotherapy scholarship and education, ableism still profoundly influences and directs the physiotherapy profession. We draw from post-structural French philosopher Gilles Deleuze’s philosophy to highlight how ableism is bound up in the taken-for-granted assumptions of physiotherapy. We outline how ableism is entangled with the profession’s ontology and European notion of human. As a result, ableism is maintained by clinicians through the embodiment of the ideal species typical human, in both the domain of the mind and body. As it stands, to do physiotherapy necessitates ableism. Imagining physiotherapy otherwise, we set out to critique and unsettle the profession’s metaphysical presuppositions, creating the possibility for new generative avenues for physiotherapy. Deleuze’s ontology of difference provides the profession an alternative starting point which makes the notion of ‘normal’, and consequently ableism, unthinkable.
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 | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.094 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".