SS59-03 NOKIIWIN TRIBAL COUNCIL COMMUNITY SURVEY: UNDERSTANDING HEALTHY WORKPLACE FACTORS IN THE INDIGENOUS CONTEXT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background / Objectives This study was conducted to help the communities of the Nokiiwin Tribal Council (NTC) understand important factors for a healthy workplace in the context of the Indigenous population. The objective was to determine the most important workplace factors within the communities in order to identify interventions to improve these factors. Methods In partnership with the NTC, we surveyed community members older than 15 years at various 2017-2018 events using electronic and paper-based surveys. Of those who were working, we examined the following workplace factors: global safety at work, workplace social capital, discrimination, interpersonal conflict at work, family work conflict, supervisor and co-worker support, and job stress for their association with the following outcomes: engagement, presenteeism, absenteeism and job satisfaction. Results Out of the 171 participants, 149 (87.1%) completed the survey. Using bivariable regression, we found that interpersonal conflict at work was associated with social engagement (β = -0.15; 95% CI -0.26, -0.05) and presenteeism (β = -0.80; 95% CI -1.39, -0.22). Family work conflict was associated with overall engagement (β = -0.15; 95% CI -0.27, -0.03) and absenteeism (β = 1.63; 95% CI 1.09, 2.43). Job stress was associated with overall engagement and job satisfaction. Supervisor and co-worker support were also associated with engagement and absenteeism. Conclusion We learned that lower interpersonal conflict at work and family work conflict, followed by higher supervisor and co-worker support and job control, were the most important healthy workplace factors influencing the communities of the NTC. This project was the first completed in partnership with the NTC.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".