Response Papers / Documents de réponse - Coming Together
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The goal of this exploratory community-based participatory action research project was twofold: to determine how urban Aboriginal youth identify their health needs within a culturally centred model of health and wellness, and to create new knowledge and research capacity by and with urban Aboriginal youth and urban Aboriginal health-care providers. A mixed-method approach was employed to examine these experiences using talking circles and a survey. The study contributes to anticolonial research in that it resists narratives of dis(ease) put forth through neocolonial research paradigms. A key focus was the development of strategies that address the aspirations of urban Aboriginal youth, laying foundations upon which their potential in health and wellness can be nurtured, supported, and realized. The study contributes to a new narrative of the health of urban Aboriginal youth within a culturally centred and culturally safe framework that acknowledges their strong connection to their Indigenous lands, languages, and traditions while also recognizing the spaces between which they move.
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 | 0.019 | 0.082 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.415 | 0.304 |
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".