MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2806304331 · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00872

The Importance of Culture in Addressing Domestic Violence for First Nation's Women

2018· article· en· W2806304331 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Donna M. Klingspohn

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Psychology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousDomestic violencePopulationMainstreamPovertyLegislationMental healthCriminologyPolitical sciencePoison controlSociologyGender studiesEconomic growthPsychologySuicide preventionMedicineEnvironmental healthPsychiatryLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Indigenous women in Canada face a range of health and social issues including domestic violence. Indigenous women (First Nations, Inuit and Métis) are six times more likely to be killed than non-Aboriginal women (Homicide in Canada, 2014; Miladinovic and Mulligan, 2015). Aboriginal women are 2.5 times more likely to be victims of violence than non-Aboriginal women (Robertson, 2010). These and other statistics highlight a significant difference in the level of violence experienced by Indigenous women to that experienced by women in the mainstream population in Canada. The historical impacts of colonization and forced assimilation are viewed as the main social determinant of health for aboriginal people in Canada, as they led to intergenerational trauma, with communities struggling today against discrimination, stigma, poverty and social exclusion. Most disturbing and damaging are the outcomes of domestic violence, mental health and addiction issues (Prussing, 2014). First Nation's women who want to leave a violent situation have limited access to helping services, as most are located in large cities and towns, far from remote reserves where many of the women live. Services were originally designed by and for the mainstream population. First Nation's women who manage to access these programs often find staff with limited cultural competence and program supports that have little cultural safety or relevance for them. Indigenous culture is defined in various levels of legislation as having a set of specific rights based on their historical ties to a particular region, with cultural or historical distinctiveness from the mainstream and other populations (Indigenous Peoples at the UN, 2014). In Canada, indigenous cultural beliefs are closely tied to belief in a creator, ancestors and the natural world, influencing their spirituality and their political perspectives (Waldram et al., 2006). Cultural safety, a concept that emerged in the 1980's in New Zealand, is viewed as an environment that is spiritually, socially, emotionally and physically safe for people; where cultural identity is recognized and valued through shared respect, meaning, knowledge and the experience of learning together. This paper will explore current evidence-based literature to determine if there is empirical evidence to support program policies and practices that reflect culturally safe, competent and relevant domestic violence services to address the cultural needs of Indigenous women in Canada.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.151
Threshold uncertainty score0.305

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0230.009
Scholarly communication0.0090.003
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0010.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.343 · 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

Citations45
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PsychologySame topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207