MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3112895091 · doi:10.9778/cmajo.20200012

The experiences of Indigenous people with cancer in Saskatchewan: a patient-oriented qualitative study using a sharing circle

2020· article· en· W3112895091 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Tracey Carr, Lorna Arcand, Rose Roberts, Jennifer R. Sedgewick, Anum Ali, Gary Groot

Bibliographic record

VenueCMAJ Open · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanSaskatchewan Health Authority
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousQualitative researchNarrativeStorytellingTheme (computing)MedicinePsychologyNursingFamily medicineSociologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Although disparities in cancer rates, later diagnoses and lower survival rates between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people have been documented, little is known about how Indigenous patients with cancer encounter the health care system. We explored perceptions and experiences of Indigenous patients with cancer and their families to understand better how 2 key concepts - trust and world view - influence cancer care decisions. METHODS: In this patient-oriented study that included participation of 2 patient partners, qualitative data were collected from Indigenous patients with cancer and their families using an Indigenous method of sharing circles. The sharing circle occurred at a culturally appropriate place, Wanuskewin Heritage Park, Saskatoon, on Sept. 22, 2017. The first patient partner started the sharing circle by sharing their cancer journey, thus engaging the Indigenous methodology of storytelling. This patient partner was involved in selecting the data collection method and recruiting participants through snowballing and social media. Trust and world view were employed as meta themes to guide our examination of the data. In keeping with Indigenous methodology, interview transcripts were analyzed using narrative analysis. The themes were reviewed and verified by a second Indigenous patient partner. RESULTS: There were 14 participants in the sharing circle. The 2 meta themes, trust and world view, comprised 8 subthemes. The meta theme trust included mistrust with diagnosis and Western treatment after cancer therapy, protection of Indigenous medicine and physician expertise with treatment recommendations. The world view meta theme included the following subthemes: best of both worlds, spiritual beliefs, required to be strong for family and importance of knowing Indigenous survivors. INTERPRETATION: This study displayed complex relations between trust and world view in the cancer journeys of Indigenous patients and their families. These findings may assist health care providers in gaining a better understanding of how trust and world view affect the decision-making of Indigenous patients regarding cancer care.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.176
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.344 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations14
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCMAJ OpenSame topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207