MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7066473012

Indigenous peoples and dementia in the Nordic region

2019· article· en· W7066473012 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueKTH Publication Database DiVA (KTH Royal Institute of Technology) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHistory of Computing Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousWelfareWork (physics)DementiaSocial WelfareEconomic shortageService (business)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Collaboration on social policy issues from the perspective of indigenous peoples is a good example of Nordic added value. The communities served by the policies are relatively small and live in countries that, to a large extent, share common challenges such as ageing populations, personnel shortages and large geographic distances. In the field of dementia, the Nordic countries’ collaborations are coordinated by the Nordic Welfare Centre. Said collaborations have demonstrated a need to: establish baseline knowledge; systemise exchanges of findings; and, create an arena for discussing what is good care and welfare for Sámi and Inuit dementia sufferers. As regards said care and welfare, there is a lack of research and evidence-based knowledge. However, certain initiatives and research projects are under way in Finland, Norway, Sweden and Greenland. This report summarises conclusions and proposals from group work at the first Nordic conference on indigenous peoples and dementia. Jointly organised by the Nordic Welfare Centre, Region Jämtland Härjedalen (Jïemhten Herjedaelien Dajve in South Sámi) and Staare 2018 (an event celebrating a Sámi centenary), the conference was held in Östersund (Staare in South Sámi) in autumn 2018. Amongst other things, this report covers: the concrete measures and changes necessary for indigenous dementia sufferers to receive better support and service in Nordic municipalities; how knowledge can be shared across municipalities and countries; and, how new knowledge can be implemented in practice. Although compiled by the Nordic Welfare Centre, the working groups’ views do not express any prioritisations or recommendations on the centre’s part. The Nordic Welfare Centre has been assigned the task of contributing to the development of welfare measures in the Nordic countries. This is to be done by: compiling and spreading knowledge; and, creating arenas for networks and research collaborations. In spring 2019, a new Nordic network was established in the field of indigenous peoples and dementia. It comprises public authority representatives, researchers and care and welfare professionals in Finland, Norway, Sweden and Greenland. This report is intended as input for: discussions on prioritisations in Nordic collaborations centred on indigenous peoples and dementia; and, local and national debates on measures at municipal and national levels. To provide some background to the proposals, the report begins by sketching out the present state of knowledge in respect of indigenous peoples and dementia in the Nordic region.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.842
Threshold uncertainty score0.656

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKTH Publication Database DiVA (KTH Royal Institute of Technology)Same topicHistory of Computing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207