The Unexpected Benefits of a Decolonized Knowledge Translation Initiative for Indigenous Mother Participants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Western health research’s approach to knowledge translation (KT) has been criticized by Indigenous scholars, leaders, and communities for its misalignment with Indigenous ways of knowing and relational approaches to sharing knowledge. Conversely, Indigenous KT is understood as ‘sharing what we know about living a good life’ (Kaplan-Myrth & Smylie, 2006). Whereas KT in Euro-Western science contexts focuses on closing the know-do gap implying a separation of knowledge and action, knowledge in the Indigenous context is inherently practical and based on centuries old practices including oral traditions, experiential knowledge, and cross-cultural sharing. This article describes the development of a decolonized KT strategy. This community-engaged KT initiative was developed at the suggestion of Indigenous mothers who participated in a research study in Hamilton, Canada, which examined their experiences using health care to meet the health needs of their infants. Indigenous mothers participated in three main roles related to the KT activities: sharing their story in video, participating as team members on an Advisory Board, and directing the creation of a video series and website educational resource (KT strategy). Five Indigenous mothers participated as members of the Advisory Board. The process of participating had positive impacts on the mothers, namely, empowerment, strength, ‘I am not alone’, and healing. These unexpected findings, which go beyond the original project purpose to create an educational resource, show the significant and important benefits for research participants, particularly those from Indigenous communities, to be involved in decolonized KT strategies.
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 | 0.030 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.001 |
| 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".