Anthropological perspectives on Miyupimaatisiiun and the integration of oral health in primary care in the Cree communities of Northern Quebec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The integration of primary oral health care has a pivotal role in improving oral health outcomes and providing accessible and affordable health care. This article contributes to the deep understanding of the cultural aspects of the integration of oral health into primary health care at an Indigenous health organization. Proceeding from a collaborative and interdisciplinary research project evaluating the integration of oral health care within primary care in Eeyou Istchee, this research is based on group discussions (6) and individual interviews (36) with 74 participants (care providers, administrators, and patients) held in four Eastern James Bay Cree communities. This study anthropologically explored participants' perceptions about primary health care conceptualizations, culturally based approaches, and experiences of oral care services at this organization using a "two-eyed seeing" Indigenous framework. The study identified three key factors related to the integration of primary oral health care: Cree perception of primary health and oral health care, cultural safety, and health provider-patient communication and the role of silence. Study findings reflected a dichotomy of perception of primary health care and the relevant units of care between the Cree structural and cultural perspective and the non-Cree professional perspective. The Cree people perceived "household" as a unit of care in comparison to non-Cree who viewed "health care services" as units of care. Our results also underline the role of cultural safety agents to address the needs for cultural competence and the role of silence as implicit cultural protocol. Our anthropological analysis illustrates the potential for increasing the level of appreciation for both users and workers in oral care in the future by ameliorating communication skills and intercultural knowledge.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".