MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4246586688 · doi:10.1016/j.cjco.2019.09.002

“All About Us”: Indigenous Data Analysis Workshop—Capacity Building in the Canadian Alliance for Healthy Hearts and Minds First Nations Cohort

2019· article· en· W4246586688 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueCJC Open · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchBayer CanadaMcMaster UniversityGenome Canada
KeywordsIndigenousEnthusiasmAllianceCapacity buildingMedical educationPublic relationsPolitical sciencePsychologyMedicineSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Research collaborations between non-Indigenous and Indigenous researchers primarily have been led by non-Indigenous researchers with privileged locations in university settings. Recognition of the importance of data sovereignty and control to enable Indigenous self-determination requires building data management and analysis capacities among Indigenous research partners. The Canadian Alliance for Healthy Hearts and Minds First Nations (CAHHM-FN) cohort study, a collaboration of 8 First Nations and researchers at 8 universities, convened a 3-day data management and analysis workshop. METHODS: Before the workshop, participating communities were asked to develop research questions of interest regarding data collected as part of CAHHM-FN and forward them to the coordinating team. An agenda was created, circulated, and modified on the basis of community feedback to plan the workshop. The CAHHM coordinating team, an Indigenous researcher, and a non-Indigenous biostatistician planned the workshop to strike balance among Indigenous protocols for engagement, theory concerning Indigenous approaches to statistical analysis, and applied data analysis training. RESULTS: Fifty participants and coordinating team members convened for the 3-day workshop (22 Indigenous and 28 non-Indigenous people from communities, professors, trainees, and staff). Topics included statistical literacy, hands-on data analysis, data security, and topics in Indigenous health research. Workshop evaluations indicated a high level of satisfaction and enthusiasm to hold similar future workshops. CONCLUSIONS: The Indigenous data workshop was designed to increase capacity for data management and analysis by Indigenous community partners and develop new capacity for non-Indigenous partners and trainees. It achieved this, with enthusiasm from Indigenous community members to conduct future workshops.

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)0.115
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.059
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.231
Threshold uncertainty score0.609

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1150.059
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0360.008
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0110.025
Research integrity0.0030.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.002

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCJC OpenSame topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207