How First Nations youth heal from attempting suicide : a phenomenological study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to conduct an in-depth qualitative exploration of how First Nations youth heal from attempting suicide. In this study there were 12 participants (6 females and 6 males) who were 19 years of age or older. All of the participants experienced either one or more suicide attempts as a youth and at the time of the study had healed from attempting suicide and were comfortable talking about it. Youth was defined as between the ages of 15 to 29. At the time of the participants' suicide attempts, most of them resided in small communities or reserves on Vancouver Island or Northern, British Columbia. A phenomenological research method was used to get a rich description of the experience and meaning of how the participants healed from attempting suicide as a youth. Unstructured, one-on-one interviews designed to capture the essence of participants' stories were conducted. The interviews were audiotaped then transcribed. The transcripts were analyzed for significant statements. The meaning of each significant statement was formulated into meaning units then organized into clusters of themes. Finally, an exhaustive description of the themes and their meaning was conducted. The intention of this study was not to compare females and males but as the analysis unfolded it became apparent that there were important differences. Therefore, separate analysis was conducted for females and males.
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 | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".