MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3195055370 · doi:10.1016/j.ssmph.2021.100899

Addressing the need for indigenous and decolonized quantitative research methods in Canada

2021· article· en· W3195055370 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Ashley Hayward, Larissa Wodtke, Aimée Craft, Tabitha Robin, Janet Smylie, Stephanie McConkey, Chyloe Healy, Leona Star, Jaime Cidro

Bibliographic record

VenueSSM - Population Health · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsFirst Nations Health and Social Secretariat of ManitobaSt. Michael's HospitalUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of OttawaUniversity of Winnipeg
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsIndigenousIndigenizationPublic healthParticipatory action researchHealth services researchSociologyMedicineBiologyNursingEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Though qualitative methods are often an appropriate Indigenous methodology and have dominated the literature on Indigenous research methods, they are not the only methods available for health research. There is a need for decolonizing and Indigenizing quantitative research methods, particularly in the discipline of epidemiology, to better address the public health needs of Indigenous populations who continue to face health inequities because of colonial systems, as well as inaccurate and incomplete data collection about themselves. For the last two decades, researchers in colonized countries have been calling for a specifically Indigenous approach to epidemiology that recognizes the limits of Western epidemiological methods, incorporates more Indigenous research methodologies and community-based participatory research methods, builds capacity by training more Indigenous epidemiologists, and supports Indigenous self-determination. Indigenous epidemiology can include a variety of approaches, including: shifting standards, such as age standardization, according to Indigenous populations to give appropriate weight to their experiences; carefully setting recruitment targets and using appropriate recruitment methods to fulfill statistical standards for stratification; acting as a bridge between Indigenous and Western technoscientific perspectives; developing culturally appropriate data collection tools; and developing distinct epidemiological methods based on Indigenous knowledge systems. This paper explores how decolonization and Indigenization of epidemiology has been operationalized in recent Canadian studies and projects, including the First Nations Regional Longitudinal Health Survey and how this decolonization and Indigenization might be augmented with the capacity-building of the future Our Health Counts Applied Indigenous Epidemiology, Health Information, and Health Services and Program Evaluation Training and Mentorship Program in Canada.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.306
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.276
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.768
Threshold uncertainty score0.890

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.3060.276
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.010
Science and technology studies0.0350.025
Scholarly communication0.0200.009
Open science0.0090.019
Research integrity0.0050.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.317
GPT teacher head0.577
Teacher spread0.259 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
DomainMethods
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

Citations63
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSM - Population HealthSame topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207