Epidemiology of Chronic Hepatitis C in Indigenous Populations in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Indigenous Peoples in Canada are disproportionately affected by chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. HCV prevalence in Indigenous Peoples is estimated at approximately five to 10-fold higher than it is in non-Indigenous persons, while the reported rate of newly diagnosed HCV cases in First Nations communities was six times the respective rate in the general Canadian population in 2022. This review explores the reasons underlying the disproportionate burden of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in Indigenous Peoples, including significant over-representation of Indigenous Peoples in the major risk categories for HCV acquisition, such as substance abuse, incarceration, homelessness or inadequate shelter, and disruption of family/social supports. The impact of these risk factors is aggravated by many access barriers to healthcare services despite the availability of universal healthcare system and free curative antiviral therapies. These stem from the legacy of colonialism, discrimination and disenfranchisement, and are exacerbated by racism in the justice and healthcare systems, stigmatization and victimization. Recent recognition of historical harms and early steps towards nation-to-nation reconciliation along with support for culturally safe, wholistic and Indigenous People-led wellness programs instill hope that elimination strategies to eradicate HCV infection in Indigenous populations will be successful in 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".