MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2256351458

Mental Health in Inuit Youth from Nunavik: Clinical Considerations on a Transcultural, Interdisciplinary, Community-oriented Approach.

2012· article· en· W2256351458 on OpenAlexaffabout
Geneviève Auclair, Mary Sappa

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthPsychologyPsychiatry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: This paper discusses the organization of mental health care for youth in Nunavik and considers how best to adapt care to the sociocultural and geographical specificities of this region. METHOD: Services are described and discussed by a general practitioner and a community worker in Nunavik. RESULTS: Current social and medical care delivery in Nunavik is provided by professionals who are largely non-Inuit and who are supported by Inuit community workers and interpreters. Community workers are key players in the provision of social and mental health care for youth. Efforts are made to adapt care to the sociocultural specificities of Inuit youth, and to locally-based multidisciplinary care addressing the multiple determinants of mental health. CONCLUSION: While efforts to adapt care are ongoing, the ideal model of care integrating transcultural, multidisciplinary and community-oriented approaches are yet to become a reality. Increased communication among care providers is suggested as a way to strengthen the current collaborative model of care. Future goals include having a majority of care being provided locally and building community ownership and governance of care institutions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.699
Threshold uncertainty score0.598

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.184
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations14
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicIndigenous Studies and Ecology→French-language works237,207→