“I’m still not over feeling so isolated”: Métis women, Two-Spirit, and gender-diverse people’s experiences of the COVID-19 pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to explore and learn from the experiences of Métis women, Two-Spirit, and gender-diverse people accessing health and social services in Victoria, British Columbia, during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This paper comes from a larger study exploring Métis women, Two-Spirit, and gender-diverse people's experiences accessing health and social services in Victoria. Using a by-and-for Métis approach that employed a conversational interview method, we conducted interviews with Métis women, Two-Spirit, and gender-diverse people who lived in and/or accessed services in Victoria in December 2020 and January 2021. This paper focuses specifically on data addressing how COVID-19 impacted these participants. RESULTS: A total of 24 Métis women, Two-Spirit, and gender-diverse people participated in the study. Overall, three themes specific to COVID-19 were identified. First, participants described the detrimental impacts of COVID-19 on their ability to connect with their Métis community and practice their culture, as well as their overall feelings of isolation. Second, participants highlighted some of the ways that COVID-19 has exacerbated existing barriers to culturally safe healthcare. Last, participants spoke about the mixed economic impacts that COVID-19 has had for them, sharing insight into the ways in which gender, in particular, has shaped their financial instability. CONCLUSION: Improving access to culturally safe health and social services by incorporating the experiences and expertise of Métis women, Two-Spirit, and gender-diverse people is crucial to mitigating the disproportional negative impacts of the pandemic and improving overall health outcomes within Métis communities across Canada.
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 | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.024 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| 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".