Voices from an aboriginal diabetes awareness, prevention and teaching program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The socio-economic and political inequities stemming from colonialism have adversely affected the health of Canadian Aboriginal people. In particular, type 2 diabetes affects these populations in disproportionately high rates. As a result, there have been calls for policy-makers, program designers and practitioners to create culturally appropriate health education programming. However, few programs have been successful. It has been argued that this is because traditional approaches to diabetes education programming do not address the unique history and lived experiences of Aboriginal people. This project explored the experiences of participants, staff, facilitators and stakeholders with an Aboriginal Diabetes Awareness Prevention and Teaching Program (ADAPT) located in a major Western Canadian city. A total of 14 people were interviewed. The primary goals were to identify how the program activities and messaging were perceived, understood and acted upon by participants; to describe how the staff and facilitators envisioned their roles with the program; and to gain insight into how ADAPT fit with the lives of participants. Critical theoretical perspectives, and in particular, postcolonial theory served as the primary paradigm for this project. Data analysis was guided by interpretive description. Program participants’ that were interviewed for this project described their experiences within two main themes: building relationships and building knowledge. Staff, facilitators and stakeholder’s experiences also centered around two main themes: building relationships with participants and facilitating change. ADAPT participants, staff, facilitators and stakeholders all described the program as a place that recognizes the impacts of that colonialism has had on people’s lives and health. The program was seen as a safe and supportive place to build relationships with others and to learn about diabetes. The findings of this project can help to inform the design of Aboriginal-focused diabetes education programs.
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 | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.034 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| 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".