MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Minority groups: an outdated concept?

2004· editorial· en· W1990329765 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Larry D. Purnell

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Nursing · 2004
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural Competency in Health Care
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEthnic groupGovernment (linguistics)Context (archaeology)Minority groupMulticulturalismHealth careDiversity (politics)ConnotationHealth equityPolitical scienceFocus groupRace (biology)Public relationsMedicineGender studiesSociologyLawLinguisticsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

English-speaking countries such as Australia, Canada, New Zealand, United Kingdom, the United States, and perhaps India and South Africa, either have initiated or renewed their interests in multicultural diversity with a focus on decreasing minority, racial and ethnic disparities in health. The use of the word ‘minority’ is inappropriate in this context because of the way it is defined and used. The United States government definition of the word minority, ‘a group differing, especially in race, religion, or ethnic background from the majority’, not only includes race, religion and ethnic background as qualification for minority status, but also other more controversial sub-groups, such as those characterized by a distinctive alternative lifestyle (Office of Minority Health 2004). These minorities have become well recognized and therefore established. Accordingly, some groups are excluded as a minority and members of some minorities are not easily recognized as being part of other groupings. Moreover, ordering groups of people as ‘minorities’ carries the connotation of lesser than, or not as important as, the majority. Inevitably this has an adverse affect on education endeavours and government policy, and more importantly on health care. Using the word ‘minority’ in this way, with established meanings that are embedded in healthcare practices and encoded in laws, regulations, contracts and especially communications, is too simplified. It excludes, mis-defines, or distorts the very focus directed at ‘minority’ interests. The term minority is simply not useful for identifying all groups that need special attention in health care delivery. Take, for example, the early years of the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) crisis. All the stress on prevention and education was directed to the ‘minority’ gay subculture, resulting in a very large segment of the population believing that other groups were not affected. Only years later after a major pandemic was occurring, education about HIV and AIDS was finally directed at all vulnerable groups. In health care, and perhaps especially in nursing, we must be more visionary and recognize that we must group people according to their vulnerabilities. Any group, regardless of ethnicity or race but given the right context and circumstances, can become a vulnerable population and it is those groups that need to be more accurately defined. Consider the possible groups in my definitions of the primary and secondary characteristics of culture. These include age (young or old), nationality, race, colour, gender, religious affiliation, educational status, intellectual ability, socioeconomic status, political beliefs, marital status, parental status, disability and chronicity, sexual orientation, urban vs. rural status, lack of social power, and immigration status such as legal immigrant, sojourner, or undocumented (Purnell 2003, pp. 1–7) As one can see from the above examples, an individual, family, or group from the dominate culture can fall into a vulnerable population. With current usage of the term ‘minority’, the chance of many groupings being adequately addressed is greatly decreased. If we can accept a wider view of grouping people based on health disparities, which certainly includes ethnic and racial groups, we could work more effectively towards eliminating barriers to effective and equitable healthcare for many ethnocultural groups. Common barriers for any group include language abilities of the client and healthcare providers; availability of health and social services; accessibility of healthcare services to the client and family; affordability, appropriateness, adaptability, and acceptability of services; attitudes and approachability of healthcare providers; alternative and complementary practices and practitioners; and additional services that support the care of children or aging parents while accessing health care (Purnell 2003, pp. 8–53). The time has come to stop using the term ‘minority’ and replace it with the more correct word ‘vulnerable’ so that all groups in need get their deserved attention. Such groups need to be recognized, regardless of whether or not they are a recognized ‘minority’. Communities, healthcare organizations, and the nursing profession must re-develop healthcare services in ways that meet the needs of all citizens, regardless of culture or racial, ethnic, or minority status.

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

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: Editorial
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablelow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Editorial
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablehigh
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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.373 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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

Citations2
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced NursingSame topicCultural Competency in Health CareFrench-language works237,207