Bibliographic record
Abstract
MANUSCRIPT TYPES AND SCOPE The Journal publishes original research, review articles, short reports, selected summaries, success stories/features, student sections, book reviews, film reviews, correspondence, and other content related to inclusion, disability, neurorehabilitation, and empowerment. All submissions must align with the journal’s aim of advancing inclusion and disability research. SUBMISSION PROCESS Manuscripts must be submitted electronically via the journal’s online submission system. Authors should register/login to the journal website, follow the “Submit a Manuscript” link. LANGUAGE, STYLE, AND EDITING Manuscripts must be in clear, academic English. (Language-editing services are available through the journal site.) Authors should use British spelling consistently. Abbreviations/acronyms: define them on first use. Use consistent terminology. FORMATTING There should be a title page, abstract, keywords, main text, acknowledgments, references, etc. (Standard sections appropriate to the article type.) Abstract: Typically concise; include key objectives, methods, results, conclusions. Lippincott Journals A few (often 3-6) words capturing the article’s scope. FIGURES & TABLES Insert figures and tables appropriately in the manuscript; ensure they are legible, well-labelled, and cited in text. Legends and captions should be detailed enough to stand alone. REFERENCES Use the Vancouver style for references Include all authors in the list; full journal names or standard abbreviations PEER REVIEW & ETHICAL STANDARDS Submissions are peer reviewed. Authors are expected to disclose any conflicts of interest. Research involving human participants must include statements about ethics approval and informed consent. AUTHOR RESPONSIBILITIES & AUTHORSHIP All listed authors must have contributed significantly to the work. Corresponding author is responsible for communication with the journal, ensuring all co-authors approve the final version. PUBLICATION FREQUENCY The journal is biannual: two issues per year. SUGGESTIONS IF YOU’RE PREPARING A MANUSCRIPT SUGGESTED FORMATTING Feel free to check recent issues of The Journal of Inclusion and Disability to see how articles are formatted, which gives hints about their preferences. Checklist for Authors TITLE PAGE The title page should include: Type of manuscript (e.g., Original Article, Review, Short Report, Selected Summary etc.) Full title of the manuscript Author details: full name, institutional affiliation (department, institution, city, country), and email address for each author Corresponding author details: full name, affiliation, postal address, email address, and phone number (if required) Declarations, including: Funding statement Conflict of interest declaration Ethical approval statement (if applicable) Consent for publication (if applicable) Data availability statement Author contributions Acknowledgments (if any) ABSTRACT (STRUCTURED) The abstract should be structured with the following headings: Background; Aims and Objectives; Materials and Methods; Results; Conclusion. Ensure it is concise, within 200 word limit, and contains no citations. INTRODUCTION Provide background information, rationale for the study, relevant literature, and clearly state the study objectives. MATERIALS AND METHODS Describe the study design, setting, study duration, sample size, inclusion and exclusion criteria, data collection methods, instruments used, and statistical analysis. Include ethical approval and informed consent statements when applicable. RESULTS Present findings clearly and logically without interpretation. Avoid duplication between text, tables, and figures. Use appropriate units, statistical indicators, and significance values. DISCUSSION Interpret key findings and compare them with existing literature. Discuss strengths, limitations, and implications. Avoid repeating detailed numerical results. CONCLUSION Provide a concise summary of the main findings aligned with the study objectives. Avoid introducing new data. REFERENCES All references must be cited in the text. Citations should appear as superscript numbers. References must be listed in chronological order of appearance. Follow Vancouver style, including authors (upto 6 authors then et al.), article title, journal abbreviation, year, volume(issue), and page numbers. TABLES All tables must be cited in the text in numerical order. Each table must have a clear title above it and a legend or footnotes below explaining abbreviations or statistical symbols. Tables should be clear, not duplicating data already in the text. FIGURES All figures must be cited in the text in numerical order. Each figure must have a descriptive legend below it. Ensure high resolution and appropriate labeling. ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS Define abbreviations at their first appearance in the manuscript. Ensure grammar, spelling, and formatting consistency (British English). Obtain required permissions for reproduced material. Label and reference supplementary materials appropriately. Editors, The Journal of Inclusion and Disability – Research, Neurorehabilitation and Empowerment
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 | 0.008 | 0.064 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.819 | 0.830 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".