Our learning journey: Creating continuing education courses for pharmacy team members on First Nations cultural safety and humility in British Columbia, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Systemic racism across healthcare systems perpetuates health disparities. While pharmacy curricula are changing, most pharmacy team members in Canada have received minimal to no training in First Nations cultural safety and humility. At the time this work was undertaken, no pharmacy-specific First Nations cultural safety and humility courses existed for practicing pharmacy team members. DESCRIPTION: Two online interactive modules were developed for pharmacy team members in British Columbia, Canada. The first focuses on anti-racism and forming relationships built on trust with First Nations clients. The second focuses on how to approach pharmacy-specific interactions with First Nations clients. Both modules leverage the CARE framework (being Considerate, Aware, Respectful, Empowering). Content was guided by a First Nations advisory group. A pharmacy advisory group helped ensure teachings could be actioned by pharmacy team members. ANALYSIS: Many lessons were learned throughout this journey. These included the importance of relationships coming first and recognizing First Nations individuals for sharing their experiences. In relation to module content, lessons centered on determining and communicating project scope, having respect for information that is not ours to share and how much language matters. Lessons in the development process included how doing things in a good way takes time and the need to look beyond module content. CONCLUSIONS: These pharmacy-specific First Nations cultural safety and humility modules serve as a good step in affecting change within the profession. IMPLICATIONS: Having an awareness of the learning and unlearning that took place during our work may help other educators as they develop local culturally responsive projects.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.002 |
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".