Difference in the Arterial Stiffness Measures between Métis Adults with High or Low Connection to Land
Bibliographic record
Abstract
College of Kinesiology Research Theme: Indigenous Wellness Introduction: Qualitative research identified land connection as a significant determinant of Métis health. Arterial stiffness, a measure of vascular health, may help evaluate the significance of land connection on cardiovascular health. This study aimed to explore how arterial stiffness measures differed between Métis adults with high or low land connection. Methods: In partnership with Saskatoon Métis Local 126, Métis adults completed an in-person, paper questionnaire about land connection. Four questions measured participants' land connection: 1) time spent on the land; 2) rural land accessibility; 3) feelings of holistic wellness from land connection; and 4) ability to connect with the land anytime. Central and peripheral pulse wave velocities (PWV) were used to measure arterial stiffness and were compared between individuals with high and low land connections. Results: The 56 participants (35 females, 21 males) had a mean age of 34 ± 13 years. For each question, the central, upper and lower peripheral PWV were similar between those with high and low land connections. For overall scores, central PWV was similar between high and low land connection groups (n = 42 vs. 11; 8.57 ± 3.83 m·s-1 vs. 8.86 ± 4.57 m·s-1; p = 0.42). Upper peripheral PWV was similar between high and low land connection groups (n = 41 vs. 11; 20.44 ± 10.39 m·s-1 vs. 25.50 ± 18.13 m·s-1; p = 0.20). Lower peripheral PWV was similar between high and low land connection groups (n = 39 vs. 11; 9.98 ± 2.35 m·s-1 vs. 10.24 ± 1.52 m·s-1; p = 0.37). Conclusion: This study found no significant association between land connection and arterial stiffness among Métis adults. Future research with larger sample sizes and appropriate control for physical activity variables is needed.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".