Disparities in Canadian Indigenous Health Research on Neurodevelopmental Disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To map the landscape of research on autism (ASD), cerebral palsy (CP), and fetal alcohol spectrum disorder (FASD) in Canadian Aboriginal children. METHOD: The authors used a detailed search strategy to identify and access publications on ASD, CP, and FASD involving Canadian Aboriginal children, families, and communities from online databases. They analyzed these materials for the type of research, stated objectives, methodologies, and the level of engagement of Aboriginal Peoples. RESULTS: The authors found a total of 52 reports published since 1981 relevant to Aboriginal children. Of these, 51 focused exclusively on FASD. They also found a near-complete failure to acknowledge community involvement in research decisions or dissemination of results in any of the publications. CONCLUSIONS: The focus on FASD in Aboriginal children and the absence of research on the other 2 major childhood disorders are at odds with rates of these disorders across Canadian children. The authors argue that this trend violates fundamental principles ensuring equitable representation of all children regardless of background in research and access to benefits of research in health care and perpetuates stigma in an already marginalized population.
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 | 0.018 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.017 | 0.024 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".