MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Inuit birthing in the Qikiqtaaluk Region of Nunavut: A place-based inquiry of maternity care systems

2024· article· en· W4402698647 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Laura Jane Brubacher, Naomi Tatty, Sherilee L. Harper, Ashlee Cunsolo, Gwen K. Healey Akearok, Sally Humphries, Cate Dewey

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth & Place · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsQaujigiartiit Health Research CentreThe Arctic Eider SocietyNunavut Research InstituteNunavut Arctic CollegeUniversity of GuelphUniversity of Waterloo
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Indian Health BoardPolar Knowledge CanadaUniversity of Guelph
KeywordsMaternity careSociologyGeographyNursingHealth carePolitical scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many Indigenous People in Northern and remote areas need to travel away from home for childbirth; however, their birthing traditions and practices are intimately tied to place. This qualitative research study characterized Inuit childbirth experiences and recommendations to enhance birthing supports in the Qikiqtaaluk Region of Nunavut in Inuit Nunangat, Canada. Birthing experiences were profoundly shaped by relationships and place attachment, and recommendations related to increased Inuit involvement in maternity care systems. Place attachment is an important determinant of Inuit maternal health and may also be for other Indigenous Peoples with intrinsically place-based livelihoods, knowledge systems, and identities. • Qualitative study focused on the childbirth experiences of Inuit in Nunavut. • Sewing sessions with pregnant people and conversational interviews were conducted. • Birthing experiences were profoundly shaped by relationships and place attachment. • Possibilities for increased Inuit involvement in maternity care were discussed. • Place attachment is an important determinant of Inuit maternal health.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.219
Threshold uncertainty score0.440

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0120.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.327 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth & PlaceSame topicIndigenous Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207