MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2409403815

Tales about tuberculosis and colonization: the socio-cultural experience of tuberculosis in Nunavut.

2007· article· en· W2409403815 on OpenAlexaffabout
Helle Møller

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCasualColonizationTuberculosisMeaning (existential)EthnographyParticipant observationMedicineQualitative researchDiseaseIncidence (geometry)EthnologyGeographyHistoryPsychologySociologyAnthropologyArchaeologyPolitical sciencePathology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To examine how Inuit in Nunavut experience and make meaning of TB, its history, protocols and regimes, and how this and the effects of historical and continuing colonization in Nunavut influence current levels of TB in Nunavut. DESIGN AND METHODS: The study was qualitative, conducted through seven months of fieldwork in two Nunavut communities utilising ethnographic methods including 42 taped interviews, casual conversations, participant observation and document review. RESULTS: Inuit participants include explanations other than biomedical when making meaning of TB, and health and disease generally. Also, Inuit participants express a preference for methods of health education different from those presently employed. Lastly, and perhaps more importantly, this study suggests that the history of colonization and continuing colonization play a significant role in how some Inuit experience TB, other disease, and health, and in the high incidence of TB in Nunavut. CONCLUSION: In order to decrease incidence of TB and increase levels of health in Nunavut decolonizing measures are necessary.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.581
Threshold uncertainty score0.832

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0140.010
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations6
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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