Heteronormativity in Canadian Healthcare: Revisioning a Queer-Focused Realm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Kia et al.'s (2024) article, "Beyond the Rainbow: Advancing 2S/LGBTQ+ Health Equity at a Time of Political Volatility," illustrates the health discrepancies that the Two-Spirit, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, asexual and other sexual and gender minority (2SLGBTQIA+) community withstand and the Canadian healthcare system's legacy of heteronormativity. This commentary focuses on the straight-centred approach of the Canadian medical system that neglects, harms and fails the 2SLGBTQIA+ population, resulting in a decline in their mental and physical well-being and increased rates of morbidity for queer individuals. The 2SLGBTQIA+ community must be placed in the front and centre of integral decision making and have the final word in policy changes within Canadian regulatory bodies.
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 | 0.054 | 0.057 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.063 | 0.104 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.030 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.008 | 0.015 |
| Research integrity | 0.021 | 0.034 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".