Northern Québec James Bay Cree Regional Health Governance in Support of Community Participation: Honouring the "Butterfly"
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Successful responses to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada's (TRC, 2015) Calls to Action require “joint leadership, trust-building, and transparency” between Canadian public institutions and First Nations. In the area of health and wellness, community participation in priority setting and planning constitutes one important step forward. In 2013, the Québec Cree regional health and social services agency launched a unique wellness planning initiative involving community participation in regional level policy-making. This article reports on a qualitative study conducted with key agency staff, an early component of a broader developmental participatory evaluation. Focusing on contextual challenges to and ways forward on community participation in planning, thematic analysis of 17 semi-structured interviews revealed important nuances between Cree and non-Cree perspectives: These perspectives reflected an empowerment versus a utilitarian view of participation, respectively. Cree Elders consulted on these results highlighted the ontological and epistemological distinction of Cree perspectives, and the importance of bringing these forth. These interpretations point to the relevance of extending cultural safety to institution-level processes bearing on relationships with communities and potentially building capacity for participation.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".