Equal Respect, Equitable Treatment: Core Commitments for Responding to Diversity and Inequality in the Health System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Fraser Health Authority (FHA) has established a framework of commitments to guide a range of issues from incorporating diversity, equity, and inclusion in clinical and policy decisions and responding to the historical and continuing discrimination against First Nations, Métis, and Inuit peoples, to creating psychologically safe environments, and dealing with harassment, bullying and other disrespectful behaviours. FHA Ethics Services hosted a workshop as part of the 2023 Canadian Bioethics Society-Société canadienne de bioéthique (CBS-SCB) Workshop and Community Forum to create an opportunity for critical reflection and discuss strategic responses for the organization to live up to these commitments. This paper summarizes the workshop and identifies key insights and issues that emerged as areas that should be addressed in responding to diversity and inequality in the health system.
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 | 0.129 | 0.123 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.040 | 0.113 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.032 | 0.023 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.046 |
| Research integrity | 0.026 | 0.055 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".