Family, culture, community: a northern First Nations community-directed needs assessment for paediatric rehabilitation care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Elders Advisory group in the northern Saskatchewan Cree community of Pelican Narrows (PN) and Peter Ballantyne Cree Nation (PBCN) directed researchers that access to paediatric rehabilitation services was an urgent priority for research collaboration. In partnership with PN and PBCN, a community needs assessment (CNA) was implemented to a) develop, sustain and nurture new and existing community-researcher relationships and b) identify community needs and preferences for paediatric rehabilitation. A community-based participatory action research approach incorporating Indigenous research principles was utilised. Community members and Elders were involved from conception through design, data collection and analysis. A mixed methods design was used. Descriptive statistics obtained using a demographic questionnaire found that all children in the study (n = 9) identified multiple developmental concerns that could benefit from rehabilitation services. Semi-structured interviews were used to gather lived experiences and stories from three healthcare providers and eight families. Analysis followed an iterative thematic approach using NVIVO software. “Family, Community and Culture” provided an overarching theme for additional themes: “Barriers to Care”, “Service Needs”, “Preferences for Pediatric Rehabilitation”, and “Potential of Virtual Care”. The results confirmed an urgent need for enhanced access to culturally-responsive, multi-disciplinary paediatric rehabilitation services and informed recommendations for future care models.
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 | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".