MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6991039918

Examining attitudes towards a proposed sugar-sweetened beverage tax among urban Indigenous adults using a decolonizing lens

2022· dissertation· en· W6991039918 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2022
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousPurchasingConsumption (sociology)CommissionGeneral partnershipPublic health
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Taxation of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSB) is a leading public health tool to reduce consumption and associated health outcomes. Compared to other racial/ethnic groups in Canada, off-reserve Indigenous populations consume SSB at higher frequencies and quantities. Indigenous populations are also disproportionately affected by type 2 diabetes and food insecurity, which are attributable to colonial policies. Governments have been called to action by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission to close gaps in these health disparities. Given the regressive nature of a tax on SSB, we need to hear the voices of Indigenous people who are targeted by such a policy. Objectives: The objectives of this thesis were to examine (1) experiences and determinants of purchasing SSB, and (2) the acceptability and anticipated impact of the proposed SSB tax among urban Indigenous adults. Methods: In partnership with the National Indigenous Diabetes Association and Fearless R2W, we conducted 20 semi-structured interviews (Nov 2019-Aug 2020) with Indigenous adults residing in Winnipeg’s NE neighborhood. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, organized in NVivo-12-Pro, and thematically analyzed. Results: All 20 participants (Female=12; Male=8; Two-Spirit=2) consumed SSB on a regular, daily basis at the time of the interview or prior at some point in their lives; three-quarters were unemployed. Objective 1: Participants’ experiences of shopping for SSB were characterized by the overarching theme of balancing on the redline, specifically (1) balancing SSB purchasing constraints and facilitators with savvy shopping approaches and (2) balancing (stereo)typical reactions with resilient coping approaches. Objective 2: Overall, most participants were strongly opposed to a SSB tax because of inter-related themes of (1) government not trustworthy, (2) taxes are ineffective and lead to inequitable outcomes, and (3) Indigenous self-determination critical. Conclusions: Results indicate that SSB represent a considerable expense to urban low-income, Indigenous residents. Finding also reveal that SSB is a source of judgment in predominantly non-Indigenous food-carrying establishments, intersecting racial prejudice and weight stigma. Low support for the tax among urban Indigenous people is characterized by concerns regarding the tax, as well as the policy makers themselves. Findings underscore the importance of Indigenous Peoples’ self-determination in informing and designing health policies that are equitable and non-stigmatizing.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.910
Threshold uncertainty score0.179

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.234 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMspace (University of Manitoba)→Same topicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights→French-language works237,207→