MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7052307867

Relational Theory, Indigenous Peoples and Health Laws and Policies

2011· article· en· W7052307867 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueeYLS (Yale Law School) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNuclear reactor physics and engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousConceptualizationAppealRelational theoryContext (archaeology)Conceptual framework
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In relational theory, the self is seen as fundamentally constituted in terms of its relations to others: it not only lives in relationship with and to others, but also owes its very existence to such relationships. Being Relational explores core moral and metaphysical concepts through a relational-theory lens and analyzes how such considerations might apply to more practical areas of concern in health law and policy. Innovative and self-reflexive, this groundbreaking collection will appeal to a broad range of thinkers, especially those who seek to understand the complex ways in which power is created and sustained relationally.\nThis chapter considers the potential of relational theory for improving the conceptualization and treatment of Indigenous health matters. Indigenous health is a particularly pressing matter, given that Indigenous peoples have carried a disproportionate burden of ill health for decades in Canada. The chapter specifically considers how relational theory could inform health laws and policies. It illustrates how relational theory provides a conceptual framework that addresses some of the shortcomings of the social determinants approach to health, which is the approach that currently informs much of Indigenous health policy planning. While the social determinants approach is helpful for identifying elements of the context that informs Indigenous health, and identifying inequalities, its utility is weakened by the fact that it tends to take the individual as its subject and focus upon that which can be expressed in statistical form. Relational theory enables a recasting of the social determinants approach, a route for dislodging it from these constraining tenets. It succeeds in this respect because relational theory is grounded, in part, in the recognition of the co-constitutive nature of community and individuals, which has several important consequences. One of these consequences is that relational theory offers an approach to understanding health determinants that resonates better with Indigenous theories of health. Another is that relational theory enables the identification of relational dimensions of inequality, which may be invisible from a traditional social determinants approach but which are essential for understanding what sort of change is necessary to improve the health and well-being of Indigenous peoples.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.100

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.045
Scholarly communication0.0060.008
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.194 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeYLS (Yale Law School)Same topicNuclear reactor physics and engineeringFrench-language works237,207