Métis Community Perspectives Inform a School-based Health Promotion Intervention Using Participatory Action Research
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Indigenous children in Canada have an increased risk of developing chronic conditions compared with the general Canadian population. There is limited understanding of the design of Comprehensive School Health (CSH) interventions to support health and wellness among Métis children. Comprehensive School Health (CSH) frameworks and interventions focus on supporting whole school and classroom environments and actions to promoting holistic health and well-being for children. This paper highlights experiences of a participatory action research (PAR) project engaging Métis community members to inform the design of a Métis comprehensive school health intervention. Findings highlight the process of enacting participatory action research in a Métis community while revealing Métis community priorities to inform a comprehensive school health intervention. We demonstrate a participatory approach to integrating Métis knowledge throughout the research process. We anticipate findings will be relevant to researchers, health care professionals, and community knowledge users working collaboratively to design health promoting interventions for the health and wellbeing of other Métis communities.
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.
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 | 0.933 | 0.703 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.734 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.783 |
| 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 it