Distance education for Inuit smoking counsellors in Canada: a case report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To describe a pilot program to implement and evaluate a part-time, community-based distance education course for Inuit smoking counsellors in Canada. STUDY DESIGN: Case report. METHODS: The distance education course used mailed resources, e-mail correspondence, conference calls and individual telephone calls. Evaluation of participant satisfaction at the end of the pilot program used e-mail questionnaires. RESULTS: Seventeen out of 21 (81%) students successfully graduated. Fourteen of 16 respondents would recommend the course, and all 16 respondents reported that they were ready to conduct both individual and group counselling for smokers who want to quit. Both learners and their supervisors reported very high levels of satisfaction with the course. CONCLUSIONS: Using distance education with adult Inuit learners worked very well. The very high completion rate achieved in this pilot program proves that there is great potential for the use of culturally affirming, structured yet flexible, learner-supportive approaches to training and capacity development in the Arctic where distances are so vast, travel costs are prohibitive and extreme weather often prevents people from attending face-to-face workshops.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".