Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alcohol abuse is attributed to four percent of the global burden of disease and associated with over 60 medical conditions. This burden is borne disproportionately by the indigenous peoples of our world. Two such indigenous populations, albeit far from one another, who are suffering from alcohol abuse are the San in Botswana and the First Nations in Canada. Both marginalised populations have high rates of alcohol abuse; however, there is a clear need for more research into the epidemiology. The public health response to alcohol abuse in indigenous populations is at a different stage in Canada and Botswana. In Canada, alcohol abuse among the First Nations has been on the agenda of public health since the release of the Indian Relations Paper in 1975. In Botswana, alcohol abuse among the San has yet to be recognized– the government response has been blind to ethnicity. This paper examines the similarities and differences between alcohol abuse issues, providing evidence that increased collaboration would lead to benefits for both populations. Neither side, those responsible for the public health of the San or First Nations, has an impeccable record – both sides could learn much from the successes and failures of the other, and other indigenous populations suffering from alcohol abuse globally.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".