COVID-19 Containment in Indigenous Communities in North-West Saskatchewan: Community and Multi-Sectoral Stakeholder Perspectives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the spring of 2020, remote Indigenous communities in the far north-western region of Saskatchewan, Canada, experienced a COVID-19 outbreak that required the collaboration of local leaders, Indigenous governments, and other multi-sectoral organizations. This study shares the stories of those involved in the response and illustrates the challenges, successes, and recommendations for future emergency preparedness. A total of 22 participants were interviewed from the impacted communities, government agencies, and organizations in public health, public safety, and law enforcement between May and August of 2021. Qualitative interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis resulting in the following themes: 1) Challenges, 2) Consequences, 3) Successes, and 4) Recommendations. A final knowledge translation event was held with key stakeholders, including public health professionals and community members, to co-create final recommendations for future public health responses in remote Indigenous communities. Our findings underscored the importance of community leadership, local investment, public health preparedness, and relationship building between organizations and jurisdictions. Lessons and recommendations from these stories can be applied to future pandemic preparedness in the province.
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 | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.024 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".