An examination of the social determinants of health as factors related to health, healing and prevention of foetal alcohol spectrum disorder in a northern context – the brightening our home fires project, Northwest Territories, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The Brightening Our Home Fires (BOHF) project was conceptualized as an exploratory project to examine the issue of the prevention of foetal alcohol spectrum disorder (FASD) from a women's health perspective in the Northwest Territories (NT). While dominant discourse suggests that FASD is preventable by abstention from alcohol during pregnancy, a broader perspective would indicate that alcohol and pregnancy is a far more complex issue, that is, bound in location, economics, social and cultural views of health. This project was prevention focused and a social determinant of health (SDH) perspective informed this research. METHODS: The BOHF project was a qualitative research project using a participatory action research framework to examine women's health and healing in the north. The methodology utilized was Photovoice. Women were provided training in digital photography and given cameras to use and keep. The primary research question utilized was: What does health and healing look like for you in your community? Women described their photos, individually or in groups around this central topic. This research was FASD informed, and women participants were aware this was an FASD prevention funded project whose approach focused on a broader context of health and lived experience. RESULTS: This project drew 30 participants from: Yellowknife, Lutsel 'ke, Behchokö and Ulukhaktok. These four different communities across the NT represented Dene and Inuit culture. The qualitative data analysis offered themes of importance to women's health in the north including: land and tradition; housing; poverty; food; family; health, mental health and trauma, and travel. Photovoice provides a non-threatening way to engage in dialogue on complex health and social issues.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".