MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3210453236

Prenatal Evacuation: Addressing the Birth Customs and Perinatal Care Needs of Indigenous Women in Northern Canada

2020· article· en· W3210453236 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Chelsea Amundsen, Arlene Kent‐Wilkinson

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational journal of nursing · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousMental healthMedicineNeglectCommissionHealth carePopulationNursingPrenatal careEnvironmental healthPolitical sciencePsychiatryLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Expectant Indigenous women in northern and remote communities across Canada are often subject to forced prenatal evacuation to give birth in urban health centers. The historical background of Health Canada’s prenatal evacuation policy is lined with elements of colonial practices as traditional birth practices and customs diminished under its implementation. Using the medicine wheel as a framework to review the physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual health impacts of prenatal evacuation on childbearing Indigenous women, it is evident they suffer from adverse birth outcomes, mental health issues, emotional distress, and cultural degeneration in part due to Health Canada’s prenatal evacuation policy. Federal reports, including the Mental Health Strategy of Canada, 2012 from the Mental Health Commission of Canada, and the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (TRC), 2015’s Calls to Action neglect to address health issues experienced by Indigenous childbearing women, leaving healthcare providers ill-equipped to address concerns specific to this population. By expanding on the Calls to Action from the TRC with current research, the healthcare provider’s role in providing culturally safe care to Northern childbearing women is in advocating for change within the Health Canada policy to allow for culturally safe care through the integration of education, social support systems, and Indigenous advanced practice healthcare professionals.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.627
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.294 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational journal of nursingSame topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207