MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2108380670 · doi:10.7202/1069345ar

Going Back to the Roots: Using the Medicine Wheel in the Healing Process

2020· article· en· W2108380670 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Robert C. Twigg, Thomas Hengen

Bibliographic record

VenueFirst Peoples Child & Family Review An Interdisciplinary Journal Honouring the Voices Perspectives and Knowledges of First Peoples · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCommunity Health and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCLARITYFoundation (evidence)Western medicineAlternative medicineMedicineNeighbourhood (mathematics)SociologyPublic relationsPsychologyEngineering ethicsEngineeringPolitical scienceLawPathologyTraditional Chinese medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article describes Building A Nation, a store front program located in the heart of the core neighbourhood (west side) of Saskatoon and its use of the Medicine Wheel in providing a blend of traditional and western support services including supportive therapy to those who come through its doors. This article begins with a discussion of the need for culturally safe and competent counselling programs and how Building A Nation meets that need. Following this the paper discusses the Medicine Wheel and how the Medicine Wheel is used in the Building A Nation program. This article is a step toward completing the recommendation by the Aboriginal Healing Foundation that Building A Nation “provide more clarity about how western and traditional healing methods complement each other or blend together (Aboriginal Healing Foundation 2006, p. 275).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.121

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.023
Scholarly communication0.0100.010
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0050.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.074
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.350 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFirst Peoples Child & Family Review An Interdisciplinary Journal Honouring the Voices Perspectives and Knowledges of First PeoplesSame topicCommunity Health and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207