Breast Reconstruction Perceptions and Access in First Nations Women Are Influenced by Colonization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: This qualitative study explored First Nations (FN) women's perceptions about breast reconstruction (BR) after breast cancer surgery. Method: Participants were recruited through purposive and snowball sampling via Aboriginal health and community organizations, breast and plastic surgeons, an Aboriginal health liaison and an FN elder. Semistructured one-on-one interviews and an FN sharing circle were conducted, transcribed, and analyzed using thematic content analysis. Results: Nine women participated in the interviews. Three (33%) had been offered and had pursued BR, while 6 (67%) were either not offered or had not pursued breast reconstruction. Two of these 6 stated that they were not interested in BR. Four women participated in the sharing circle; 2 had been interviewed prior and 2 were new participants who shared similar themes and experiences to other participants also interviewed. Four key themes were identified: identity, information gaps, financial and transportation barriers, and consequences of colonization. Reasons cited to pursue BR were consistent with non-FN women such as improving self-image, concepts of femininity, and sense of normalcy. All participants reported that accessible, appropriate, and timely and culturally sensitive BR information was lacking. Living on reserve and the attendant expenses related to attending medical appointments was another barrier experienced by women in our study. The devastating impacts of colonization also deeply impacted several women in our study. Conclusion: When offered, FN women were receptive to pursuing BR. FN women have a particular set of obstacles related to consequences of colonization. Culturally sensitive and relevant oral communications grounded in first-hand experiences are desired. The 4 themes identified did influence the rate of BR uptake in the FN women who participated in our study and provided significant and unique obstacles to FN women.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".