Linking Inuit Knowledge and Public Health for Improved Child and Youth Oral Health in NunatuKavut
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The oral health of Inuit children in Canada has been identified as a public health crisis. Although efforts are being made to identify and address ways to deal with this crisis, current policy and program approaches are largely entrenched within the prevailing paradigm of dental science to the exclusion of Indigenous people's understandings of health. This article reports qualitative findings of a larger study aimed at identifying, understanding, and addressing rates of oral disease among children living in NunatuKavut, a cluster of small, coastal Inuit communities located in southern Labrador, Canada. Through 18 focus groups with youth (n = 86), caregivers (n = 22), and interviews with key informant (n = 13), this study begins to elucidate southern Inuit understandings of oral health. Theorized using Two-Eyed Seeing, an Indigenous approach to balancing both Indigenous and non-Indigenous understandings of the world, the findings reported here reveal 3 themes, each of which is crosscut by historical and contemporary dimensions: 1) (w)holistic conceptualizations of health are essential to good oral health, 2) achieving optimal oral health is prohibitive for Inuit communities, and 3) community-engaged oral health service delivery is needed. Our recommendations have implications for improved oral public health service delivery for Inuit communities, in that the inclusion of Inuit perspectives on oral health should form an instrumental element of oral public health service delivery. Knowledge Transfer Statement: The results of this study may be used by clinicians and oral health educators to inform approaches to oral health service delivery within the context of Indigenous communities. It may also be used by policymakers to recognize how historical and contemporary issues of colonization relate to the formation of oral health-related policies.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".