Building on strengths in Naujaat: the process of engaging Inuit youth in suicide prevention
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Death by suicide and attempted suicide among Inuit youth is now considered a public health emergency of epidemic proportion, with rates among the highest worldwide. A strong sense of cultural identity and pride, as well as social capital, has been identified as being protective against suicide. The Canadian Institute for Health Research (CIHR) Guidelines for Health Research Involving Aboriginal People call for communities to be included in the conception, planning and implementation of research. The authors took first steps towards sharing the responsibility of designing a community initiative with the youth of Naujaat, Nunavut, a community located directly on the Arctic Circle. With the objectives of promoting open listening and exploration of community needs and enhancing self-determination and sustainability, we postulated a youth resiliency project that will be co-authored by the community. This paper describes the joint work process. We recount how Inuit youth take ownership of the project with the guidance of Ms. Elizabeth Haqpi, a Naujaat Elder. The article will particularly reflect on the process of balancing the different perspectives and expectations while enjoying the richness of mutual learning through keeping each other accountable.
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 | 0.021 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.034 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.021 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".