MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415684739 · doi:10.32799/ijih.v21i1.44399

First Nations and Métis Employees’ Experiences: Exploring Successes in Non-First Nations and Métis Organizations Through a Community-Based Project

2025· article· W4415684739 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Maureen Plante, Kiray Forest, Lena Betker, Gwendolyn Villebrun, Mélissa Tremblay

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Indigenous Health · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersMitacs
KeywordsCommissionAction (physics)Qualitative researchAction researchNarrativeGrounded theory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (TRC) Calls to Action stipulates to increase and retain the number of First Nations, Métis and Inuit employees in the healthcare sector. While many non-First Nations, Métis and Inuit organizations recognize the importance of this call, many organizations often struggle with how to reflect and proceed effectively, humbly, and with intention. Retention of First Nations, Métis and Inuit employees requires thoughtful organizational support, which benefits not only employees through improved well-being, development, and reduced burnout, but enhances services for the people they serve. This community based project used qualitative description grounded with First Nations, Métis and Inuit approaches to research to explore what supports success for First Nations, Métis and Inuit employees working in non-First Nations, Métis and Inuit organizations. Four women of First Nations or Métis heritage were invited to an interview to discuss successes. We found that the importance of allyship, autonomy, and opportunities for professional development contributed to these women’s successful experiences working in non-First Nations, Métis and Inuit organizations. These findings support First Nations and Métis employees' experiences at non-First Nations and Métis organizations. Organizations are encouraged to authentically hire, retain, and support First Nations, Métis and Inuit employees proceeding with intention and humility, including understanding roles as allies.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.585
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0310.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.323 · 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.

Study designQualitative
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
Published2025
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Indigenous HealthSame topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207