Bibliographic record
Abstract
Providing clinical care to children from Indigenous backgrounds is a privilege afforded to many paediatricians across the country. This work, however, makes it disturbingly apparent that certain structural inequities obstruct these children’s right to the highest attainable standard of health (1). For example, in northern Manitoba, housing shortages and poor ventilation (2,3) result in infants requiring recurrent medical evacuation by air for bronchiolitis. Astronomical grocery prices in Nunavut and on reserves have compounded the impacts of shifting from traditional to commercial foods, leading to food insecurity (4), child malnourishment, type 2 diabetes, and obesity (5–8). Perhaps most heartbreakingly, adolescent suicides continue to plague many communities in northern Manitoba, Northern Ontario, Nunavik, and Nunavut (9,10). Despite recent glimmers of promise (11–14), these issues have not provoked a sense of ‘enough is enough’ among those who create policies, establish budgets, and set strategic priorities. Why—in a country that has ratified the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (15), supports the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (16,17) and has a Charter of Rights and Freedoms in which equality is enshrined in law (18)—are the lives of these children and adolescents valued less than those of their non-Indigenous peers?
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.055 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.336 | 0.137 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".