Are Métis mothers receiving adequate prenatal care in Ontario? A population-based study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective and ApproachIn Canada, Métis people are one of three distinct Indigenous Peoples whose rights are recognized and affirmed in Section 35 of the federal Constitution Act, 1982. Currently, there is a paucity of health research regarding Métis maternal and prenatal in Canada. Prenatal care is a frequently used health service that can reduce the incidence of perinatal morbidity and mortality and measures of adequate prenatal care have been established in the Canadian context. The objective of our study is to examine the receipt of adequate prenatal care among mothers who are citizens of the Métis Nation of Ontario (MNO) who had a live birth between 2012 and 2022. This population-based study will use the MNO citizenship registry linked to health administrative and demographic databases in Ontario, Canada’s most populous province. Results and ConclusionThere were 2,615 live births to Métis mothers registered with the MNO between 2012 and 2022. Métis mothers were younger and more likely to live in a rural location relative to other Ontarian mothers. Analysis is still ongoing and results on prenatal care adequacy will be presented. ImplicationsThe findings may be used to inform MNO’s Healthy Babies Healthy Children program, designed to support Métis mothers, children, and families from prenatal to six years of age across Ontario. The program’s goal is to ensure equitable access to resources, support, and knowledge for Métis families, so their children have the best possible opportunity to thrive.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".