Indigenous and minority peoples and cultural safety: the role of Nursing Praxis.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Undeniably, Nursing Praxis has played an important role in promoting nursing research addressing the nexus between nurses' practice and the people with whom they work. The journal began as a place for nurses to exchange ideas, and to contemplate what nursing is about, and envision its future directions (Perry, 1985). The current strategic focus for Nursing Praxis is cultural safety, indigenous health, and vulnerable populations. Since the first publication of Nursing Praxis in November 1985, 31% of all the articles pertain to cultural safety (25%), indigenous (15%), and vulnerable (60%) populations. Dissemination and translation of research is essential to assist practitioners, funders, planners, and policy makers in their roles. It is the what? question that we should ask when reviewing research outcomes. Moreover, this crystallises the need for interpretations of research findings with Indigenous, minority and vulnerable groups to also be critically informed by concepts such as social justice, human rights, equity, and intersectionality.Nursing Praxis is recognised nationally and internationally as a place where authors can pubish research or discursive papers related to cultural safety, indigenous health, and vulnerable populations. For me, the need and importance for nurses and other health professionals to disseminate research and ignite debate was highlighted at conferences I attended last year (that is, the International Academy of Nurse Editors Conference (held in Cork, Ireland) and the Critical Perspectives in Nursing and Health Care Conference (held in Vancouver, Canada)). That Nursing Praxis has a place in the world was confirmed by the responses to a presentation at last year's International Academy of Nurse Editors conference in Cork, Ireland, about our journal and what we were doing. With the update of our website, we have been able to take advantage of the analytic tools to see that approximately half of those visiting the Nursing Praxis website are international visitors, predominately from North America.The nexus between people's culture and health is complex, yet its importance for nurses and health providers will undeniably grow with the increasing multiplicity, diversity, and complexity of ethnic and cultural groups within many communities. In addition to Indigenous peoples and those with settler ancestry, increasing and diverse migratory patterns, particularly the mix of new migrants, those who have lived in a country for two or more generations, intermarriage, and the recognition of the cultural needs of nonethnic groups such as those with disabilities makes this an important area in which to share ideas, research findings, and to debate their various aspects in relation to health and wellbeing. The tenet that culture is an important factor in the health and wellbeing of people, their whanau/families, and communities has been long established within health and nursing (Leininger, 1970). Nonetheless, people belonging to Indigenous, minority, and vulnerable groups encounter cultural dissonance on a daily basis. This is so even with a backdrop where cultural safety and cultural competence feature as part of the New Zealand regulated health workforce practice requirements, and there are ongoing global and societal calls to address existing inequalities and inequities. Cultural responsiveness is an area that we constantly grapple with as a profession, generally with universal approaches to nursing and health service delivery being the default position. …
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".