The Medicine Bundle Pilot: An Indigenous Two-Spirit Approach to HIV and STBBI Health in British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The social determinants of health and the determinants of Indigenous health, including the historical and ongoing effects of settler-colonialism across Turtle Island, contribute to increased rates of HIV and sexually transmitted and blood-borne infections (STBBI) facing Indigenous people in Canada. Two-Spirit and queer Indigenous folks face further systemic barriers to accessing sexual health resources. The Medicine Bundle Pilot project takes a strengths-based approach to addressing health inequities in HIV and STBBI awareness and prevention. The Medicine Bundle Pilot was developed by the Community-Based Research Centre’s Two-Spirit Program to address barriers and increase culturally safe access to sexual health resources for Indigenous people in British Columbia. The Medicine Bundle is an Indigenous-developed approach to the HIV self-test kit and dried-blood spot test, combining traditional Indigenous medicines with Western sexual health resources. Medicine Bundles were distributed to Indigenous communities and community members across British Columbia, fostering safer pathways to care. My thesis aimed to (1) understand participants’ experience with the Medicine Bundle Pilot, and (2) determine barriers and access limitations to sexual health resources for Indigenous people in British Columbia. Existing barriers include limited access to sexual health resources within communities and being wrongfully denied access to services. Results demonstrate that the Medicine Bundle is a very effective sexual health resource for Indigenous people, and participants reported improved experiences with testing through the Medicine Bundle.
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 | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".