MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Moments of Care in and Among Ravaged Reveries: Etuaptmumk Weavings of Community with Compassion

2025· article· en· W4415999563 on OpenAlexaff
Stefanie Ruel, Adriana van Hilten, Angel Henchey

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademy of Management Proceedings · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityToronto Metropolitan UniversityCape Breton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompassionEmpathyIndigenousEnd-of-life careEthical issuesEthics of careHealth careSensemaking

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Embracing Western concepts of ethics of care weaved with Indigenous ways of knowing community and care by means of Etuaptmumk/Two-Eyed Seeing, the trio of authors explore the ravaged reveries of a sudden death survivor. The authors celebrate ‘being in community with’, as they compassionately ‘care with’. Guided by their research question, what role do compassion and care play in the ongoing life of a sudden death survivor?, the authors embark on a writing differently journey, via poetry and a post hoc duoethnography, where community, compassion, and care provided to the survivor are shared and explored. Prioritizing the griever and acknowledging the trio’s pain and sensemaking from ‘knowing’ her, their established care community is celebrated to inspire others to provide examples of safe harbours that can be created for sudden death survivors as they begin returning to life and work. The authors offer their co-learning experiences, along with exploring the space of differences to promote humanity-based moral discourses on care and compassion in context, contributing to the compassion and ethics of care literature, and continuing to live in this world humanly.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0170.018
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0010.010
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademy of Management Proceedings→Same topicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights→French-language works237,207→