The Future of Indigenous Health Policy in Manitoba: Moving Beyond Soft Reconciliation in Health
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines the changing nature of Indigenous healthcare and policy in Manitoba focusing on two critical healthcare gaps in the province: the health transfer policy, a policy that continues to be counterproductive to Indigenous health and well-being; and the intended closure of Grandview’s EMS station and its failure to consider First Nations and Métis perspectives and access to care. Drawing on over a decade of community-engaged research in the province, our research argues for the need to move beyond soft reconciliation efforts in Indigenous health to reinterpreting Canada’s colonial history by recognizing Indigenous peoples’ hard rights to healthcare. Reconciliation should bring about changes to bureaucratic structures and challenge non-Indigenous peoples’ values. Health system changes in Indigenous communities, without consultation, will continue to negatively impact community life and wellbeing. This article is intended to contribute to a broader discussion about the future of Indigenous healthcare, policy and reconciliation efforts in Manitoba.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.028 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".