“We need to work hand in hand”: supporting cancer survivorship care with First Nations and Métis peoples in Canada via video
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is a lack of access to culturally safe and individualized cancer survivorship care and awareness of the unique challenges and strengths that Indigenous persons living with cancer (PLCs) face. This study aimed to explore the experiences and needs of First Nations and Métis PLCs across Canada. From 2014 to 2016, we engaged 87 participants who were either PLCs or caregivers (CGs) from five communities across Canada—Gitxsan and Kenora, British Columbia; Ottawa, Ontario; and Akwesasne and Kahnawake, Quebec—using participatory arts-based methods. Following the thematic analysis of participants’ photographs, journal entries, and stories, we created a video exploring the themes of spirituality and ceremony, finding strength together, the land and nature, creating and sharing, and navigating health care. Participants’ feedback on the video supports the use of video as a knowledge translation tool that may promote meaningful dialogue around the cancer experiences of Indigenous peoples in Canada.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".