Canada's Aboriginal Peoples and Health: The Perpetuation of Inequalities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Who are Aboriginal Canadians and what is their reality? How is the health inequality experienced by Aboriginal Canadians being addressed? Why do such health inequalities persist today? Canada has a publicly funded health-care system that many Canadians understandably are proud of. However, not all peoples have benefited equally. The health status of Canada's original peoples on virtually all indicators of health is below that of non-Aboriginal Canadians. They have higher mortality and morbidity rates and higher incidences of tuberculosis, alcoholism, and suicide than the rest of the population. They also are more likely to be unemployed, to live in poverty and substandard housing, and to have lower education attainment levels. This chapter explores possible explanations for these equities and situates the existing inequality in a broader social and historical context Aboriginal people's experiences of colonization, dispossession, and marginalization from the dominant economy. As well, the chapter explores the health implications of these processes. Although efforts have been made to improve the health status of Aboriginal peoples, many structural inequalities remain.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.003 | 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".