Heart Health Begins With Community: Community-Based Research Exploring Innovative Strategies to Support First Nations Heart Health
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Indigenous people have displayed their strength through their holistic practices and spiritual connection to the land. Despite overcoming the impact of discriminatory and disempowering policies within Western institutions, Indigenous people continue to experience a higher risk of cardiovascular disease, compared to the general population. To move toward improving Indigenous health outcomes, researchers need to work in partnership with communities to develop heart health strategies centred on their experienced barriers and sources of healing. We conducted a community-based explorative study in Moosonee, Ontario to explore the local community's needs and priorities regarding heart health and wellness. Methods: . Results: Eight community members and 5 healthcare professionals participated in the sharing circle. Four dominant themes were identified: (1) heart health is more than metrics; (2) honouring our traumas; (3) destigmatizing care through relationship building; and (4) innovative solutions start with community. With the history of mistreatment among Indigenous people, strength-based solutions involved rebuilding clinical relationships. To bring care closer to home, digital health tools were widely accepted, but the design of these tools needs to integrate both Western and Indigenous approaches to healing. Conclusions: Indigenous health upholds the physical, emotional, psychological, and spiritual needs of an individual as being of equal importance. To improve community heart health, strategies should start by strengthening broken bonds and bridging multiple worldviews of healing.
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 | 0.021 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.071 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".