A Concept Analysis of Cultural Appreciation in Addressing the Wholistic Health Needs of Indigenous People
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: Cultural appreciation is found within the arts, psychology, counseling, health disciplines, and education. Currently, in the literature, there is not a strong link between cultural appreciation, nursing, and Indigenous people. The aim of this concept analysis is to analyze the concept of cultural appreciation for nurse educators, nurse researchers, and nurse leaders to apply to culturally appreciate Indigenous people within their geographical areas which can result in meeting their wholistic care needs. Design: This concept analysis of cultural appreciation uses Walker & Avant’s (2019) approach to define cultural appreciation, antecedents, empirical referents, and consequences. Results: The antecedents of cultural appreciation are cultural appropriation, oppression, cultural prejudice, privilege, and lack of knowledge to integrate the wholistic health of Indigenous people into practice, education, and research. The defining attributes of cultural appreciation are awareness, knowledge acquisition, and desire. The consequence of cultural appreciation is wholistic care of Indigenous people as defined by their ways of knowing and being. Conclusion: The concept analysis of cultural appreciation integrates Indigenous wholistic health beliefs and ways of knowing and being that can advance holistic nursing knowledge for nurses, educators, and researchers.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".