MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2885835319

Sexual Exploitation Prevention Education for Indigenous Girls

2018· article· en· W2885835319 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Dustin William Louie

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Education / Revue canadienne de l éducation · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSex work and related issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousPsychological interventionIntervention (counseling)Reproductive healthSexual abusePrisonSexual violenceCriminologyPsychologyGender studiesSociologyMedicinePoison controlSuicide preventionEnvironmental healthPsychiatryPopulationEcology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Indigenous girls in Western Canada comprise over half of the victims of sexual exploitation, but the gravity of this phenomenon is overlooked in education and academia. Five Indigenous sexual exploitation survivors and 19 service providers in a western Canadian city were interviewed to critically examine the life experiences that establish pathways to exploitation, methods of recruitment, and prevention education recommendations to inform school-based interventions. Based on these interviews, nine pathways to sexual exploitation for Indigenous girls were uncovered, most notably sexual abuse, transition from reserves, and the prison system. This article summarizes a study conducted from 2014–2016 (Louie, 2016), which found that an extensive range of gender, age, race, and class backgrounds in Canadian society contribute to Indigenous girls being recruited into sexual exploitation. At present, most research and education programs emphasize intervention, missing a key opportunity to prevent recruitment into sexual exploitation. This study has generated a potential framework for schools to establish prevention education for Indigenous girls experiencing an increased threat of sexual exploitation.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.710
Threshold uncertainty score0.583

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations5
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Education / Revue canadienne de l éducationSame topicSex work and related issuesFrench-language works237,207