MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2734527317 · doi:10.1007/s11469-017-9791-6

Mental Health Perceptions and Practices of a Cree Community in Northern Ontario: A Qualitative Study

2017· article· en· W2734527317 on OpenAlexaffabout
David Danto, Russ Walsh

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Mental Health and Addiction · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph-Humber
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthQualitative researchHealth psychologyPublic healthSpiritualityCommunity healthRelocationCommunity-based participatory researchNursingOpenness to experienceOppressionMedicinePsychologyParticipatory action researchSociologyPsychiatrySocial psychologyAlternative medicinePolitical scienceSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This project is a qualitative study of the mental health perceptions and practices of one Aboriginal community in the northern Ontario James and Hudson Bay region. Despite a shared history of trauma and oppression with the other five Cree communities in this area, as well as an added trauma of natural disaster and subsequent relocation, this community has been reported to have markedly lower rates of mental health services utilization and suicide. Interviews with eight community leaders and mental health services providers were conducted and analyzed in order to identify the features that distinguish this community. In line with recent recommendations for culturally sensitive and community-compatible research methods, participants' narratives were organized in terms of the "medicine wheel" of traditional healing. Results showed strong connection to the land and traditions, openness to both traditional and Christian spirituality, community engagement, and shared parenting as strengths valued by a majority of participants.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.179
Threshold uncertainty score0.359

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0140.009
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.061
GPT teacher head0.475
Teacher spread0.414 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Mental Health and AddictionSame topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207