Aboriginal Community Controlled Organisations Leading the Way in Child Health Research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Historically, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander research in Australia has adhered to Western research paradigms and contributed to the adverse impacts of colonisation. However, recent developments driven by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and scholars, and development of ethical guidelines for research, have promoted a more inclusive and collaborative research landscape. In this study, published papers and internal documents arising from a long-term partnership between Marninwarntikura Women's Resource Centre (MWRC) and the University of Sydney (USYD) from 2009 to 2023 were analysed using the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Quality Appraisal Tool and consultations with project partners. Every project had Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander governance, leadership, and inclusive consultation; was driven by community-identified priorities, built local capacity, and benefitted the community. There was an increase in the use of Indigenous research paradigms and data/intellectual property (IP) agreements over time, reflecting responsiveness to community leadership. This partnership exemplifies community-driven, co-designed, Aboriginal-led health research and serves as a model for effective collaboration with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander 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 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 | 0.311 | 0.229 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.017 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.003 |
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".