Perspectives on restoring health shared by Cree women, Alberta, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to explore nehiyaw iskwêwak (Cree women's) perceptions and beliefs about how to restore balance to health. Fifteen indigenous women from Northern Alberta, Canada, participated in a 3-day cultural retreat on beauty and art in British Columbia, Canada, in May 2015. At the end of the retreat, these women were invited to participate in a talking circle and asked, 'What does restoring balance look like?' A constructivist grounded theory approach was used to explore individual and collective perspectives on restoring health. Nehiyaw iskwêwak provided a vision of health using metaphors from the natural environment. Starting points and core characteristics of health were grounded in relationship with self, others, place and the land, suggesting interventions grounded in land-based pedagogy and focused on restoring relationship and secure attachment might be effective for this population. Nehiyaw iskwêwak also said interventions should start at the individual level; as the individual restores balance mentally, emotionally, physically and spiritually, a long-term ripple effect can be initiated through the generations and community when these women in turn support the strengthening and nurturing of relations (e.g. parents, siblings, friends, children, grandchildren) for the next seven generations.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.039 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".