Manufacturing Social Exclusion in the Home Care Market." Canadian Public Policy XXVII(2
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article examine comment la perspective des services de santé qui englobe les soins à domicile obscurcit l’ampleur des processus d’exclusion sociale qui se manifestent dans cette arène des politiques publiques. Une étude de femmes âgées et de femmes handicapées recevant des soins à domicile en Ontario révèle que les soins organisés dans la communauté génèrent et renforcent l’isolement social des usagers de ces services ainsi que leur exclusion spatiale, institutionnelle et politique. L’analyse des expériences des sujets partici-pant à cette étude met en évidence les défis à relever pour s’éloigner d’un discours de marché et d’une structure établie et pour développer une politique de soins à domicile qui parvienne à l’inclusion et à la participation des citoyens âgés et des handicapés ayant besoin d’une aide à domicile. This paper examines how the health care perspective which dominates home care obscures the broader processes of social exclusion that play out in this arena of public policy. A study of elderly women and women with disabilities receiving home care in Ontario reveals how managed community care generates and reinforces service users ’ social isolation and their spatial, institutional, and political exclusion. Analysis of study participants ’ experiences points to the challenges of moving away from a market discourse and a health framework to develop home care policy which achieves the inclusion and participation of elderly citizens and citizens with disabilities in need of assistance at home.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.000 |
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.
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".