MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4385482802 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0288984

“Because of COVID…”: The impacts of COVID-19 on First Nation people accessing the HIV cascade of care in Manitoba, Canada

2023· article· en· W4385482802 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Linda Larcombe, Laurie Ringaert, Gayle Restall, Albert McLeod, Elizabeth Hydesmith, Ann Favel, Melissa Morris, Michael Payne, Rusty Souleymanov, Yoav Keynan, Kelly S. MacDonald, Matthew Singer, Jared Star, Pamela Orr

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsNine Circles Community Health CentreUniversity of Manitoba
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPandemicHealth careIndigenousQualitative researchParticipatory action researchHealth equityStigma (botany)MedicineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)NursingPublic healthFamily medicineGerontologyEconomic growthSociologyDiseasePsychiatryInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic (March 2020-May 2023) had a profound effect around the world with vulnerable people being particularly affected, including worsening existing health inequalities. This article explores the impact of the pandemic on health services for First Nations people living with HIV (FN-PWLE) in Manitoba, Canada. This study investigated perceptions of both health care providers and FN-PWLE through qualitative interviews occurring between July 2020 and February 2022 to understand their experience and identify lessons learned that could be translated into health system changes. METHODS: Using a qualitative, participatory-action, intentional decolonizing approach for this study we included an Indigenous knowledge keeper and Indigenous research associates with lived experience as part of the study team. A total of twenty-five [25] in-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted with eleven healthcare providers (HCPs) and fourteen First Nation people with lived HIV experience (FN-PWLE). In total, 18/25 or 72% of the study participants self-identified as First Nation people. RESULTS: The COVID-19 pandemic negatively impacted health services access for FN-PWLE, a) disrupted relationships between FN-PWLE and healthcare providers, b) disrupted access to testing, in-person appointments, and medications, and c) intersectional stigma was compounded. Though, the COVID-19 pandemic also led to positive effects, including the creation of innovative solutions for the health system overall. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic exaggerated pre-existing barriers and facilitators for Manitoba FN-PWLE accessing and using the healthcare system. COVID-19 impacted health system facilitators such as relationships and supports, particularly for First Nation people who are structurally disadvantaged and needing more wrap-around care to address social determinants of health. Innovations during times of crisis, included novel ways to improve access to care and medications, illustrated how the health system can quickly provide solutions to long-standing barriers, especially for geographical barriers. Lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic should be considered for improvements to the health system's HIV cascade of care for FN-PWLE and other health system improvements for First Nations people with other chronic diseases and conditions. Finally, this study illustrates the value of qualitative and First Nation decolonizing research methods. Further studies are needed, working together with First Nations organizations and communities, to apply these recommendations and innovations to change health care and people's lives.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.112
Threshold uncertainty score0.811

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0240.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights→French-language works237,207→