MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396994272 · doi:10.1681/asn.20213210s1638b

“I Just Don't Trust It”: Exploring the Role of Mistrust in Shaping Living Donor Kidney Transplant Pathways for African, Caribbean, and Black communities in Toronto, Canada

2021· article· en· W4396994272 on OpenAlexaffabout
Lydia-Joi Marshall

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Society of Nephrology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrgan Donation and Transplantation
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKidney transplantMedicineGerontologyGender studiesSociologyGeographyKidneyKidney transplantationInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: In Canada, African, Caribbean, and Black [ACB] patients with kidney failure are 40-70% less likely to receive a LDKT compared to Whites. To date, research has focused on individual factors, neglecting the impact of systemic racism in shaping ACB community attitudes toward LDKT. Further absent is Canadian research using qualitative methodologies. Methods: We used an exploratory qualitative approach to understand perspectives and attitudes about LDKT in Canadian ACB communities. Using purposive and snowball sampling, we recruited 81 self-identified ACB community participants to take part in eight focus group discussions between January and November 2020. Participants were asked questions about their racial and ethnic identities, medical experiences and attitudes, and knowledge and perspectives on LDKT. We then applied a Critical Race analytical framework to analyze transcripts, focusing on the tenets of racial consciousness, social location, power dynamics, and counternarratives. Results: Of the 81 participants 63% was female, 46% were <50 years of age, 53% were immigrants to Canada. 36% self-identified as North American Black/African; 48% as Caribbean; 6% as North African; and 4% as Central/West African. Three key themes emerged from the data. First, we found that like in the U.S., participants expressed medical mistrust. Second, this medical mistrust was rooted in a combination of processes of racialization (medical racism), historical legacies of medical mistreatment, and lived negative experiences within the health care system. Lastly, medical mistrust informed health and illness related decision-making risk assessment, perspectives on LDKT, (lack of) engagement with traditional health care settings, and medical needs. Conclusions: ACB community attitudes and decision-making processes about LDKT are complex, historically-rooted, and informed by broader medical mistrust. This suggests that broader systemic racial barriers to adequate health care outside of the LDKT pathway, may have far-reaching effects. Further research is needed to better understand how the broader medical experiences of ACB communities may be an underappreciated factor that shapes racial disparities in transplantation, and the kinds of interventions needed to facilitate better access to LDKT. Funding: Government Support - Non-U.S.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.967
Threshold uncertainty score0.500

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0330.013
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0030.008
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.221 · 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.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Society of NephrologySame topicOrgan Donation and TransplantationFrench-language works237,207