The Rights of People With Disabilities in Policy Development Comment on "How Did Governments Address the Needs of People With Disabilities During the COVID-19 Pandemic? An Analysis of 14 Countries’ Policies Based on the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons With Disabilities"
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Shikako et al analysis highlights that needs of persons with disability (PwD) were often overlooked, with policies primarily focused on general population health measures rather than specific accommodations for PwD. This commentary suggests adopting universal design principles in policy development to ensure inclusivity and advocate for maintaining services essential for PwD even during crises. It emphasizes the importance of involving PwD in policy-making processes and enhancing data collection for better policy analysis and concludes with recommendations for creating more inclusive policies, stressing the need for international collaboration and the integration of PwD needs into all policy levels.
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 | 0.017 | 0.046 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.062 | 0.052 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
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".