Experiences of Indigenous people with bariatric surgical care in Manitoba
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Obesity and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) are growing global health concerns associated with significant morbidity, mortality and increasing healthcare expenditures. Indigenous peoples are at higher lifetime risk of both and poorer health outcomes. This work aimed to explore the experiences of Indigenous who had undergone bariatric surgery. Methods We established relationships with Indigenous community leaders. A mixed methods scoping review of experiences and outcomes of Indigenous patients undergoing bariatric surgery was conducted. Guided by an Indigenous Elder, we gathered knowledge through Sacred sharing circles, ceremony and Traditional teachings in a decolonized way. Results Scoping review found Indigenous patients have poorer access to bariatric surgery with similar weight loss outcomes and strong motivators for pursuing bariatric surgery. Relationship building, community involvement, and honoring tradition are crucial when conducting research with Indigenous communities. Indigenous people undergoing bariatric surgery in Manitoba had positive experiences, strong motivators, and felt that more cultural supports were needed. Conclusion Bariatric surgery is an effective treatment for obesity and T2DM. Research with Indigenous communities to close gaps in health outcomes must be done in a good way, rooted in Indigenous methodologies. Indigenous patients have strong motivators for pursuing surgery, and have a desire for non-surgical, culturally relevant supports along the bariatric pathway. Culturally sensitive care is necessary for Indigenous patients in bariatric clinic settings.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".