Body-related experiences of two young rural Aboriginal women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There has been a gradual increase in health research that explores the body-related experiences of young Aboriginal women living in urban and reserve settings. However, the voices of rural Canadian Aboriginal women not living on reserves, appear to be absent from this literature. The purpose of this study, therefore, is to better understand the body-related experiences of young Aboriginal women living in rural Canadian communities. Case study was utilized as the strategy of inquiry in which each of two young women (both 15 years of age) represented a case. One-on-one interviews were used to explore the young women’s experiences. Four themes emerged: (1) fitting in, (2) rural uniqueness, (3) role models, and (4) body talk. The primary contribution of this study is that it sheds light on the unique body-related experiences of two young women, each living in a rural community where she is the only teenaged Aboriginal woman. Despite some similarities, the young women related very different stories of their experiences in their respective communities. This research also highlights some of the ethical challenges of ensuring that the stories of the young women are adequately represented, while their confidentiality is respected.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".