Yukon First Nations Youth Mental Wellness: The Development of Culturally Appropriate Healing.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this thesis is to examine Indigenous versus Western philosophies that pertain to treatment of mental health and wellbeing for Indigenous youth in the Yukon. This thesis is framed by two questions about the experience of identity for Yukon First Nations Youth: (1) How are Yukon First Nations Youth able to develop and sustain their individual and collective identity by balancing the two worlds they live in? And (2) What is the Yukon First Nations perspective on spirituality, mental health and Youth suicide prevention? It is pertinent that a distinction be made between what has been implemented in health care and seen as the social norm in terms of the Western use of power versus emphasis on spiritual truth. The words Spirituality and Healing are synonymous to Indigenous philosophies of wellness. There is a need for culturally appropriate healing approaches in the Yukon. This thesis focuses on solutions for the First Nations youth in the Yukon, as described by two Elders, two service providers, a mom and a dad, and the two youth that I talked to, thus taking a unique and insightful approach. The questions they were asked have identified how these people view youth developing and sustaining their individual and collective identity by balancing the two worlds they live in. --P. v.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".