MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403614989 · doi:10.1017/one.2024.10

Implementation evaluation of a pilot project addressing issues at the human–dog interface in a northern indigenous community

2024· article· en· W4403614989 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Léa Delesalle, Liam Callaghan, Johanne Saint-Charles, André Ravel, Cécile Aenishaenslin

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Directions One Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHuman-Animal Interaction Studies
Canadian institutionsSociologie et SociétésMakivik CorporationUniversité de MontréalUniversité du Québec à MontréalCegep de Saint Hyacinthe
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsIndigenousInterface (matter)Environmental resource managementEnvironmental planningEngineeringEngineering ethicsEngineering managementGeographyEnvironmental scienceEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In 2020, the Kuujjuaq Dog Project (KDP) was operationalized in the Northern Village of Kuujjuaq (Québec, Canada) to mitigate issues at the human–dog interface. Differing from previous interventions in its EcoHealth approach, it provided veterinary services, educational components (school workshops and Facebook posts) and strengthened local dog control measures. In 2022, an implementation evaluation assessed its quality of its delivery, differentiation, adaptations and the community’s responsiveness. The study followed key principles of the One Health approach and a mixed-methods design, combining a survey of 74 participants and individual interviews with 10 key stakeholders and 25 other community members. Analysis confirmed the relevance of the KDP, highlighting its innovative nature compared to previous dog-related interventions in northern Québec. Awareness of and exposure to the KDP’s components varied considerably between veterinary services (89%), Facebook posts (55%) and school workshops (27%). Global exposure to both the veterinary services and educational components was lower among Inuit, men and non-dog owners (not statistically significant). Barriers and facilitators to implementation included long-term engagement of stakeholders and building meaningful partnerships with local stakeholders. Beside supporting the future evolution of the KDP, this study fills knowledge gaps on how to successfully implement integrated, participatory interventions in northern Indigenous communities.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.398
Threshold uncertainty score0.957

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.457
GPT teacher head0.636
Teacher spread0.179 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Directions One HealthSame topicHuman-Animal Interaction StudiesFrench-language works237,207