MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2154240604 · doi:10.1177/104973200129118363

Aboriginal Grandmothers’ Experience with Health Promotion and Participatory Action Research

2000· article· en· W2154240604 on OpenAlexaff
Geraldine Dickson

Bibliographic record

VenueQualitative Health Research · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCommunity Health and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersMinistry of Economy, Trade and Industry
KeywordsEmpowermentHealth promotionParticipatory action researchCitizen journalismAction (physics)Action researchPsychologyNursingPromotion (chess)Medical educationMedicineSociologyPublic healthPolitical sciencePedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article describes a case study examining the effects of participating in a health promotion project, one aspect of which was a health assessment conducted using participatory action research. The study was carried out over 2.5 years in a project for older Aboriginal women (hereafter known as the grandmothers). Participation in the project and health assessment contributed to a number of changes in them, which were categorized as cleansing and healing, connecting with self, acquiring knowledge and skills, connecting within the group, and external exposure and engagement. This experience demonstrated an approach to health promotion programming and conducting a health assessment that was acceptable to this group of people and fostered changes congruent with empowerment.

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)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.952
Threshold uncertainty score0.132

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0230.015
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0020.010
Research integrity0.0030.004
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 head0.885
GPT teacher head0.777
Teacher spread0.109 · 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

Citations79
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQualitative Health ResearchSame topicCommunity Health and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207