Relationship building for research: The Southern Saskatchewan/Urban Aboriginal Health Coalition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Southern Saskatchewan/Urban Aboriginal Health Coalition is an interdisciplinary, intersectoral team of researchers and communities dedicated to exploring what 'culturally respectful' care means in Aboriginal communities. Although the purpose of the research project was to examine this concept in an effort to improve health care service delivery and education for health professions, the members of the Coalition realized early in the process that one of the primary factors related to the success of the project would be the building and sustaining of relationships. This paper describes a relational process that was used to initiate, facilitate, and support a research partnership with the Aboriginal communities. Through a community-based process, two communities and the Coalition used sharing circles and workshops as a method to create relationships and begin a discussion about what constitutes key elements of culturally respectful health care and education. These elements have not yet been determined as the Coalition and community members have focused on fostering relationships which have been critical to building the partnership with the Aboriginal communities.
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 | 0.046 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.033 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.025 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".