MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283828340 · doi:10.32799/ijih.v17i1.36724

Two-Spirits’ response to COVID-19: Survey Findings in Atlantic Canada identify Priorities and Developing Practices

2022· article· en· W4283828340 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
John R. Sylliboy, Naomi Bird, Evan J. Butler, Kehisha Wilmot, Gage Perley

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Indigenous Health · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCommunity Health and Development
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAllianceIndigenousPandemicMental healthPsychological interventionCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Public relationsSociologyPolitical scienceMedicineNursingPsychiatryLawEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Wabanaki Two-Spirit Alliance (W2SA), a regional Two-Spirit organization, administered an online survey in May of 2020 to identify priorities and concerns of Two-Spirit (2S) individuals and Indigenous 2SLGBTQQIA+ people in Atlantic Canada during the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. The respondents (n=149) shared health concerns including deterioration(s) of mental health (56.32%) and described mental health supports (68.42%), health supports for Two-Spirit individuals (57.89%), healing gatherings (46.05%) and trans-specific supports (44.74%) as critical interventions in fostering Two-Spirit health. The Alliance’s immediate response was to develop community-led responses to address urgent concerns. Our key promising practice has been hosting Two-Spirit gatherings as community-based health/cultural supports; the gatherings also serve as an opportunity for the Alliance to consult the Two-Spirit community about priorities and concerns. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the Alliance explored ways to keep the Two-Spirit community safe while maintaining critical social support(s) and gaining invaluable knowledge from the Two-Spirit community. We designed a survey that provided critical feedback resulting in the Alliance shifting priorities towards developing ways to bring Two-Spirit people together safely by virtual means, seeking sustainable resources to address emerging health concerns, and increasing capacity development of the Alliance.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.302

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.143
GPT teacher head0.515
Teacher spread0.373 · 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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Indigenous HealthSame topicCommunity Health and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207