Health promotion for dementia risk reduction in Indigenous populations of Canada, Aotearoa New Zealand, United States of America, and Australia: Scoping review protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Health promotion programs and strategies have the potential to support people to live healthier lives. Dementia, a collective name for brain disorders that impact thinking and memory, affects over 55 million people worldwide. Currently, there is no cure for dementia, so prevention is critical. Health promotion has the potential to reduce dementia by targeting the twelve potentially modifiable risk factors. A project currently being undertaken by the research team aims to strengthen the quality of clinical care and health services that specifically address dementia risk for Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. One of the intended strategies supporting the project's aim is the need for appropriate and safe health promotion programs and resources that support dementia risk reduction. Consequently, the aim of this scoping review is to identify and determine the quality and appropriateness of existing health promotion programs and resources aimed at dementia risk reduction developed or modified for Indigenous populations of Canada, the USA, Aotearoa New Zealand, and Australia that could be incorporated into the broader project. The Joanna Briggs Institute method for scoping reviews will be used to identify programs and resources focussed on dementia risk reduction for Indigenous peoples. Searches will be limited to the English language and literature published since January 2010. Databases to be searched include: CINAHL, Medline, PsychInfo, PubMed, Scopus and Google. Data that answers the research questions will be extracted from the literature and recorded on a data charting form. A combination of quantitative and qualitative methods will be used to analyse the findings of the scoping review. Dissemination of the findings through continuing community engagement, conference presentations and publications will be led by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander members of the research team.
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 | 0.067 | 0.055 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.013 | 0.011 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.022 | 0.022 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.055 | 0.007 |
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".