La santé des Premières nations, des Inuits et des Métis: les facteurs que doivent envisager les leaders en santé canadiens dans la foulée du rapport de la Commission de vérité et réconciliation du Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les peuples des Premières nations, inuits et métis qui habitent au Canada sont aux prises avec de profondes disparités en matière de santé par rapport aux Canadiens non autochtones, et ce, dans presque toutes les mesures liées à la santé et au bien-être. Pour faire progresser les services de santé auprès des peuples autochtones, il faut passer à l'action dans tous les ordres de prestation des soins et des politiques en santé. Il est donc essentiel que les leaders et les prestataires des établissements, des systèmes et des installations de santé du Canada comprennent et prennent en main les déterminants de la santé propres aux peuples autochtones, y compris l'héritage du colonialisme et le racisme ancien et actuel. La Commission de vérité et réconciliation du Canada est le point de départ pour réagir de manière positive aux injustices.
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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".