Bridging stories : exploring métis experiences in accessing family planning services
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Métis clients seeking family planning services in British Columbia often encounter mistreatment, shame, and barriers to accessing contraception and abortion care. This study comprises two parts aimed at comprehensively exploring their experiences. In Part 1, a qualitative investigation was conducted to understand Métis clients' encounters with family planning care access (Aim 1 and 2). Through analysis, an overarching theme emerged, encapsulating the essence of their experiences as "Feeling lost in a system that does not value relational care." Within this overarching theme, five key sub-themes were identified: "Searching for a consistent healthcare provider: 'I’ve never gone to the same doctor twice,'" highlighting the lack of continuity in care and mistreatment from healthcare providers; "Prioritizing care despite costs," revealing the financial, emotional and physical challenges faced by Métis clients in accessing abortion and contraception services; "Jumping through hoops to find information," indicating the difficulties in navigating complex healthcare systems; "Feeling shame in family planning care due to legacies of trauma," addressing the deeply ingrained cultural and historical factors influencing perceptions of reproductive healthcare; and "Needing Métis-specific family planning services," emphasizing the importance of culturally tailored and community-responsive care. In Part 2 of the study, the concept of Métis-specific services was further examined through an eight-person community conversation. This community conversation aimed to deepen the understanding of Métis perspectives and preferences regarding family planning care (Aim 3). The community conversation generated three additional emerging themes: "Acceptance from our Elders and health care professionals," highlighting the significance of cultural validation and support from trusted sources; "Communication: ‘There is a huge disconnect,'" emphasizing the challenges in effective communication between Métis clients and healthcare providers; and "Cultural Safety: Could the answer be Métis-Specific Services?" prompting reflection on the potential benefits of culturally tailored healthcare services.This research sheds light on the multifaceted challenges faced by Métis individuals in accessing family planning care in British Columbia and elevates the importance of developing culturally relevant and inclusive healthcare services that address the unique needs and preferences of Métis communities.
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 | 0.006 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".