MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2930481075 · doi:10.14430/arctic67856

Understanding Fall-Risk Factors for Inuvialuit Elders in Inuvik, Northwest Territories, Canada

2019· article· en· W2930481075 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Julia Frigault, Audrey R. Giles

Bibliographic record

VenueARCTIC · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoison controlIndigenousSuicide preventionInjury preventionHuman factors and ergonomicsGerontologyOccupational safety and healthCoping (psychology)Socioeconomic statusPsychologyMedicineEnvironmental healthPopulationClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Older Indigenous adults in Canada experience disproportionately poorer health outcomes than older non-Indigenous adults. Current fall-prevention literature suggests that older Indigenous adults have higher rates of falls and fall-related injuries; however, no information exists on older Inuit adults’ experience with falls. Using the social determinants of Inuit health (SDoIH) as a conceptual framework, this research sought to understand which of the SDoIH are believed by stakeholders (i.e., local fall prevention programmers [LFPPs] and Inuvialuit Elders) to affect most the likelihood of older Inuvialuit adults’ falls. The findings from the 12 semi-structured interviews and participant observations show that factors related to personal health status and conditions, personal health practices and coping skills, physical environments, social support networks, and access to health services increase older Inuvialuit adults’ likelihood of experiencing a fall. Some determinants, however, decrease their likelihood of experiencing falls (health practices, coping skills, and access to health services), and others, such as culture, were perceived as having little influence on falls. Specific cultural practices were identified as factors that influence the likelihood of older Inuvialuit adults experiencing a fall; however, the overall Inuvialuit culture was not. In light of these findings, we offer recommendations for LFPPs in Inuvik to implement fall-prevention programs that adequately address the SDoIH influencing older Inuvialuit adults’ fall risk and rates.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.203

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueARCTICSame topicIndigenous Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207