MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1588155316 · doi:10.1071/he11033

Health literacy and Australian Indigenous peoples: an analysis of the role of language and worldview

2011· article· en· W1588155316 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Promotion Journal of Australia · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCommunity Health and Development
Canadian institutionsAboriginal Affairs Northern Dev Canada
FundersAustralian Government
KeywordsIndigenousHealth literacyLiteracyEmpowermentSociologyPublic healthCommunity healthIndigenous languageSocial scienceMedicinePedagogyPolitical scienceNursingHealth care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article delineates specific issues relating to health literacy for Indigenous Australians. Drawing on the extensive experience of the authors' work with Yolnu people (of north-east Arnhem Land) and using one model for health literacy described in the international literature, various components of health literacy are explored, including fundamental literacy, scientific literacy, community literacy and cultural literacy. By matching these components to the characteristics of Yolnu people, the authors argue that language and worldview form an integral part of health education methodology when working with Indigenous people whose first language is not English and who do not have a biomedical worldview in their history. Only through acknowledging and actively engaging with these characteristics of Indigenous people can all aspects of health literacy be addressed and health empowerment be attained.

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.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.379
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.116
GPT teacher head0.462
Teacher spread0.345 · 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