Informing care pathways and policies for children and youth with Indigenous perspectives to advance Canada's National Autism Strategy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Canada, most services for Autistic people are provided by provincial and territorial governments. However, support for Indigenous Peoples (First Nations, Inuit, and Métis) are under federal responsibility and are outlined by a set of treaties and agreements with the Crown and a few regional governments. This patchwork results in barriers in service access and navigation challenges in many under-resourced communities, including under-diagnosis and potentially life-threatening outcomes. Designing equitable policy structures and processes would reduce harms and meaningfully interface with Indigenous and other racialized communities. The objective of this Policy Practice Review is to provide a framework for the discovery of appropriate care strategies addressing the conceptualization of autism in Indigenous Peoples and to understand the interactions between racialized Autistic peoples and the Criminal Justice System. First, we conducted environmental scans of publicly-accessible government services available in Canada pertaining to autism in Indigenous communities and the justice system, and explored the dissonance with beliefs and perceptions of autism in Northern Indigenous communities. Second, we focused on the interactions of Indigenous and other racialized populations, with an emphasis on Autistic children and youth with the justice system, an interaction that is often life-altering, downstream, and detrimental to health and wellbeing. The implications of this work include identifying the need for Indigenous-led knowledge and policy recommendations for Canada's upcoming National Autism Strategy, informing the need for culturally appropriate multidisciplinary care and facilitating the coordination between health and social services for these communities.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".