Two‐eyed seeing: A useful gaze in Indigenous medical education research
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT: Medical education has a role in preparing future health care practitioners to have the skills to meaningfully address health disparities while providing effective clinical care considerate of diversity in our societies. This calls for medical education researchers to approach their craft in ways that prioritise and value inputs from a broader range of perspectives and worldviews in an effort to redress the negative impacts of social, political and structural forces on health outcomes. METHODS: Given the entrenched health inequities experienced by Indigenous populations across the globe, this paper details an approach to medical education research put forward by Canadian Mi'kmaw Elders Murdena and Albert Marshall and named 'two-eyed seeing'. This approach provides the opportunity for medical education researchers to address the ongoing impacts of colonisation, racism and marginalisation on health outcomes by prioritising Indigenous worldviews in medical curricula. The need for researchers and medical academies to critically consider Indigenous governance and processes of respectful knowledge sharing within the wider institutional and societal contexts is addressed. CONCLUSIONS: The benefits of two-eyed seeing in the context of better preparing the future workforce to effectively meet the needs of those most vulnerable, and to action change against health inequities, situate it as a promising research approach in medical education.
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.
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 | 0.004 | 0.043 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 it