MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402412217 · doi:10.1177/00110000241279120

“When I Spoke, I Spoke From the Heart”: Empirical Insights and Therapeutic Lessons From an Indigenous Counseling Center

2024· article· en· W4402412217 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rachel E. Wilbur, Tony V Pham, Joseph P. Gone

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Counseling Psychologist · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCounseling Practices and Supervision
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousPsychologyCounseling psychologyCenter (category theory)Spoke-hub distribution paradigmEmpirical researchMedical educationPsychotherapistMedicineEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Indigenous Peoples in Canada experience inequities in behavioral health outcomes stemming from colonial subjugation, including tacit cultural assimilation through health care. Indigenous communities assert that culturally commensurate health interventions improve wellbeing. This study, conducted with clients and staff at a First Nations behavioral health treatment program, sought to identify how respondents conceived of the therapeutic endeavor with respect to possibilities for remedying colonial injuries such as the abuses of the Indian Residential Schools (IRSs). Thematic analysis of 32 interviews revealed that targeted therapeutic goals as well as specific counselor qualities were important for a positive therapeutic experience for those in the program. Ultimately, assimilative practices, such as the IRSs of the past and mainstream behavioral health treatment programs in the present may collectively contribute to the continuation of inequities in health outcomes for Indigenous Canadians. Decolonizing the therapeutic endeavor offers a potential avenue for positive change.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.724
Threshold uncertainty score0.555

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0370.017
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0020.004
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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.330 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Counseling PsychologistSame topicCounseling Practices and SupervisionFrench-language works237,207