MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394794927 · doi:10.1071/py23172

Co-designing a Health Journey Mapping resource for culturally safe health care with and for First Nations people

2024· article· en· W4394794927 on OpenAlex
Alyssa Cormick, Amy Graham, Tahlee Stevenson, Kelli Owen, Kim O’Donnell, Janet Kelly

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Journal of Primary Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of WaterlooLowitja InstituteFlinders University
KeywordsUsabilityHealth careParticipatory action researchResource (disambiguation)Health equityMedicinePublic relationsKnowledge managementNursingPublic healthSociologyComputer sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Many healthcare professionals and services strive to improve cultural safety of care for Australia's First Nations people. However, they work within established systems and structures that do not reliably meet diverse health care needs nor reflect culturally safe paradigms. Journey mapping approaches can improve understanding of patient/client healthcare priorities and care delivery challenges from healthcare professionals' perspectives leading to improved responses that address discriminatory practices and institutional racism. This project aimed to review accessibility and usability of the existing Managing Two Worlds Together (MTWT) patient journey mapping tools and resources, and develop new Health Journey Mapping (HJM) tools and resources. Method Four repeated cycles of collaborative participatory action research were undertaken using repeated cycles of look and listen, think and discuss, take action together. A literature search and survey were conducted to review accessibility and usability of MTWT tools and resources. First Nations patients and families, and First Nations and non-First Nations researchers, hospital and university educators and healthcare professionals (end users), reviewed and tested HJM prototypes, shaping design, format and focus. Results The MTWT tool and resources have been used across multiple health care, research and education settings. However, many users experienced initial difficulty engaging with the tool and offered suggested improvements in design and usability. End user feedback on HJM prototypes identified the need for three distinct mapping tools for three different purposes: clinical care, detailed care planning and strategic mapping, to be accompanied by comprehensive resource materials, instructional guides, videos and case study examples. These were linked to continuous quality improvement and accreditation standards to enhance uptake in healthcare settings. Conclusion The new HJM tools and resources effectively map diverse journeys and assist recognition and application of strengths-based, holistic and culturally safe approaches to health care.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.872
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0120.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.322 · 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