MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366534525 · doi:10.1177/11786329231169939

Indigenous Cultural Safety Trainings for Healthcare Professionals Working in Ontario, Canada: Context and Considerations for Healthcare Institutions

2023· review· en· W4366534525 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Services Insights · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousCultural safetyHealth careContext (archaeology)NursingPublic relationsCultural competencePatient safetyMedicineMedical educationPolitical sciencePsychologyPedagogyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Racism and discrimination are realities faced by Indigenous peoples navigating the healthcare system in Canada. Countless experiences of injustice, prejudice, and maltreatment calls for systemic action to redress professional practices of health care professionals and staff alike. Research points to Indigenous cultural safety training in healthcare systems to educate, train, and provide non-Indigenous trainees the necessary skills and knowledge to work with and alongside Indigenous peoples using cultural safe practices grounded in respect and empathy. Objective: We aim to inform the development and delivery of Indigenous cultural safety training within and across healthcare settings in the Canadian context, through repository of Indigenous cultural safety training examples, toolkits, and evaluations. Methods: An environmental scan of both gray (government and organization-issued) and academic literature is employed, following protocols developed by Shahid and Turin (2018). Synthesis: Indigenous cultural safety training and toolkits are collected and described according to similar and distinct characteristics and highlighting promising Indigenous cultural safety training practices for adoption by healthcare institutions and personnel. Gaps of the analysis are described, providing direction for future research. Final recommendations based on overall findings including key areas for consideration in Indigenous cultural safety training development and delivery. Conclusion: The findings uncover the potential of Indigenous cultural safety training to improve healthcare experiences of all Indigenous Peoples. With the information, healthcare institutions, professionals, researchers, and volunteers will be well equipped to support and promote their Indigenous cultural safety training development and delivery.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.939
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0220.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.164
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.264 · 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