The health of Canada’s Aboriginal children: results from the First Nations and Inuit Regional Health Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Reports on child health in Canada often refer to the disproportionate burden of poor health experienced by Aboriginal children and youth, yet little national data are available. This paper describes the health of First Nations and Inuit children and youth based on the First Nations and Inuit Regional Health Survey (FNIRHS). STUDY DESIGN: The FNIRHS combines data from 9 regional surveys conducted in 1996-1997 in Aboriginal reserve communities in all provinces. The target population consisted of all on-reserve communities. All households or a random sample of households or adults (depending on province) were selected based on their population representation. METHODS: One child was randomly selected from each participating household, except in Ontario and Nova Scotia, where children were randomly selected based upon their population representation. Alberta did not include the section on children's health in their regional survey. RESULTS: Approximately 84% of adults, who were proxy respondents for their child, rated their children's health as very good or excellent. The most frequently reported conditions were ear problems (15%), followed by allergies (13%) and asthma (12%). Broken bones or fractures were the most frequently reported injuries (13%). Respondents reported that 17% of children had behavioural or emotional problems. Overall, 76% of children were reported to get along with the family "very well" or "quite well." CONCLUSIONS: While most respondents rated their child's health as very good or excellent, injuries, emotional and behavioural problems, respiratory conditions and ear problems were reported among many Aboriginal children. Issues such as substance abuse, exposure to violence and academic performance were not addressed in the 10 core survey questions. Clearly there is a need for more in-depth information about both the physical and emotional health of Aboriginal children and youth.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".