MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1578101376 · doi:10.1177/160940691501400109

First Nations, Inuit, and Métis Women's Experiences of Cancer Survivorship: Protocol for the National Picture Project

2015· article· en· W1578101376 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Qualitative Methods · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicParticipatory Visual Research Methods
Canadian institutionsFirst Nations Health and Social Secretariat of ManitobaUniversity of New BrunswickUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotovoiceJournaling file systemGeneral partnershipSpiritualityNursingPsychologyMedicineMedical educationPublic relationsPolitical scienceAlternative medicineEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Little is known about First Nations, Inuit, and Métis (FNIM) women's experiences with cancer, including how they relate to cultural and social factors such as geography, history, racism, identity, traditional values/practices, and spirituality. Research into FNIM women's strengths and challenges in relation to cancer is much needed. Our team, in partnership with Saint Elizabeth Health, is documenting the experiences and needs of 60 FNIM cancer survivors across Canada, using sharing sessions, photography (photovoice), journaling, and film. We will evaluate the impact of photography and journaling on the participants to assist with the future development of supportive programs and health- care delivery. This innovative research will result in a video, which will address gaps in knowledge and care. The video will then be screened in several communities and will be publicly available. In future projects, the findings and video will be used in supportive programs for cancer survivors and in educational initiatives for health professionals.

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.

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Protocol
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: yes
Qualitativehigh
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Protocol
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: yes
Qualitativehigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.049
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.055
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.214
Threshold uncertainty score0.979

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0490.055
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.923
GPT teacher head0.801
Teacher spread0.122 · 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