Building community-based HIV and STI prevention programs on the tundra: drawing on Inuit women’s strengths and resiliencies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is a dearth of literature to guide the development of community-based HIV and Sexually Transmitted Infection (STI) prevention and sexual health promotion programs within Inuit communities. The aim of this research project was to create a dialogue with Inuit women to inform future development of such programs. This study employed Indigenous methodologies and methods by drawing from Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit and postcolonial research theory in a framework of Two-Eyed Seeing, and utilizing storytelling sessions to gather data. Community-Based Participatory Research Principles informed the design of the study, ensuring participants were involved in all stages of the project. Nine story-sharing sessions took place with 21 Inuit women ages 18-60. Participants identified several key determinants of sexual health and shared ideas for innovative approaches that they believe will work as prevention efforts within their community. These research results build upon the limited knowledge currently available about perceptions of HIV and STI among Inuit women living in the remote north.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".