The Relationship Between Culture, Health Conceptions, and Health Practices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated cultural variations in health conceptions and practices using a quasi-experimental design. A total of 60 participants, recruited from three cultural groups in Canada, were individually interviewed between the fall of 2009 and the fall of 2010. Transcribed interviews were quantified according to the importance participants ascribed to emergent themes. The data generated three intriguing findings: (a) Consistent with an interdependent self-construal or ecological self, First Nations participants were more likely to report health conceptions and practices that expand beyond the individual self to include their family, the community, and the environment when compared with Anglophones and Francophones of European ancestry; (b) First Nations participants placed more importance on maintaining their traditions and culture as a health-promoting strategy, compared with Anglophones and Francophones; and (c) some of the health conceptions identified by all three groups significantly predicted the practices they engage in to promote health. These findings suggest that culture has a noticeable impact on health conceptions, which in turn influence health practices. There are at least two important implications: (a) Health policy makers need to take into account the role culture plays in the way people conceptualize health to ensure that health policies and programs reflect the particular beliefs and needs of their target populations and (b) health-care professionals need to be aware of the diverse views of their patients to provide culturally appropriate care.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".