MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2758997486 · doi:10.1177/1043659617731818

Designing an eHealth Breastfeeding Resource With Indigenous Families Using a Participatory Design

2017· article· en· W2758997486 on OpenAlex
Jennifer Abbass‐Dick, Michele Brolly, Joanne Huizinga, Amber Newport, Fangli Xie, Stephanie George, Elisabeth Sterken

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Transcultural Nursing · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBreastfeeding Practices and Influences
Canadian institutionsRegional Municipality of DurhamOntario Tech University
FundersGovernment of Ontario
KeywordsIndigenousGeneral partnershipeHealthBreastfeedingCulturally appropriateResource (disambiguation)Participatory action researchParticipatory designCommunity-based participatory researchNursingCitizen journalismMedicineHealth carePublic relationsSociologyEconomic growthPolitical scienceFamily medicineEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The traditional practice of breastfeeding has been negatively affected by the historical trauma experienced by the Canadian Indigenous community. Culturally relevant information and support should be created to enable the communities to reclaim this traditionally revered infant feeding method. The objective of this participatory design study was to work in partnership with Indigenous communities to create an eHealth breastfeeding resource for Indigenous families. METHODOLOGY: In partnership with Indigenous mothers and care providers in Ontario, Canada, an eHealth breastfeeding resource was designed based on their recommendations. Once the new resource was created, it was evaluated by additional Indigenous mothers. RESULTS: The participants indicated the resource was culturally relevant and that they liked the content and design. DISCUSSION: Using a participatory design when creating services and programs in partnership with Indigenous communities ensures the creation of resources that meet their needs, are culturally relevant, and align with cultural beliefs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.737
Threshold uncertainty score0.903

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.253 · 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