Honouring Stories: Mi'kmaq Women's Experiences with Pap Screening in Eastern Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mi'kmaq women are reported to have lower rates of Papanicolaou (Pap) screening and higher rates of cervical cancer than non-Aboriginal women. This qualitative participatory study used postcolonial feminist perspectives and Indigenous principles to explore Mi'kmaq women's experiences with Pap screening within the contexts that shaped their experiences. Community facilitators assisted with the research process. Talking circles and individual in-depth interviews were conducted with 16 Mi'kmaq women. Also, health-care providers were interviewed in 2 Mi'kmaq communities. The findings indicate that historical and social contexts are shaping Mi'kmaq women's screening experiences and that these experiences are diverse, as are their understandings about screening. Some women were accessing regular screening despite challenging personal circumstances. The results highlight the need for nurses and other health-care providers to understand the uniqueness of each woman's experiences with Pap screening. Improvements in screening rates depend on multifaceted nursing approaches developed in partnership with Mi'kmaq women.
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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".