National Aboriginal Youth Suicide Prevention Strategy Multiple Case Study of Community Initiatives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This is a report of a collaborative research project involving members associated with NAYSPS-funded community projects.. Four sites were selected on the basis of the extent to which they might be expected to have individual and community-level impact and variation in geographical region. The sites were located in Alberta (Hobbema), Saskatchewan (Battlefords Tribal Council Indian Health Service), Québec (Uashat mak Mani-utenam) and Labrador (Nunatsiavut). The case studies were participatory; each project recruited the services of a local research mentor who worked in conjunction with members of the NAYSPS-funded program community to produce the research. Research questions varied across the four identified case sites according to the needs of the particular sites, although all studies were guided by the NAYSPS evaluation framework (Cousins & Chouinard, 2007). The study designs were all quite similar with each study relying on multiple sources of information and evidence. Given that most sites had not been collecting evaluation or project monitoring information over time, the designs were limited to retrospective cross-sectional explorations of processes and impacts. While the studies used fairly traditional
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".