MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3187053728 · doi:10.1080/22423982.2021.1946324

Acute health care among Indigenous patients in Canada: a scoping review

2021· review· en· W3187053728 on OpenAlexaffabout
Laura-Philippe Vigneault, Ella Diendéré, Catherine Sohier-Poirier, Margo Abi Hanna, Annie Poirier, Maude St‐Onge

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Circumpolar Health · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousHealth careMedicineAcute careOfficerPublic healthInclusion (mineral)Family medicineNursingPsychologyGeographyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A recent report by the Chief Public Health Officer of Canada demonstrates the inferior health status of Indigenous Peoples in Canada when compared to non-Indigenous populations. This scoping review maps out the available literature concerning acute health care for Indigenous Peoples in Canada in order to better understand the health care issues they face. All existing articles concerning health care provided to Indigenous Peoples in Canada in acute settings were included in this review. The targeted studied outcomes were access to care, health care satisfaction, hospital visit rates, mortality, quality of care, length of stay and cost per hospitalisation. 114 articles were identified. The most studied outcomes were hospitalisation rates (58.8%), length of stay (28.0%), mortality (25.4%) and quality of care (24.6%) Frequently studied topics included pulmonary disease, injuries, cardiovascular disease and mental illness. Indigenous Peoples presented lower levels of satisfaction and access to care although they tend to be over-represented in hospitalisation rates for acute care. Greater inclusion of Indigenous Peoples in the health care system and in the training of health care providers is necessary to ensure a better quality of care that is culturally safe for Indigenous Peoples.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.699
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.375 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations24
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Circumpolar HealthSame topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207