MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7161813977 · doi:10.82308/43249

Food security of Canadian Arctic indigenous women

2006· dissertation· en· W7161813977 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Allison Jill. Lambden

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArcticIndigenousFood securityFishingThe arcticQuality (philosophy)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This secondary data analysis used a cross-sectional survey of 1771 Yukon First Nations, Dene/Metis, and Inuit women. The aims were to evaluate access to traditional food (TF) and market food (MF), identify perceived advantages of TF and MF, and explore under-studied characteristics of FS in Arctic Canada. Results indicate considerable regional variation in ability to afford adequate food, varying between 26 and 58%. Similarly, regional variation was reflected in the percentage of women who had access to hunting or fishing equipment. Participants described culturally relevant FS indicators: food needed to be natural, fresh, tasty, varied, healthy, safe, accessible, and convenient. Between 10 and 38% of participants noticed recent changes in the quality or health of TFs. Caribou, moose, and seal were popular TFs and considered particularly healthy. This study emphasizes the importance of TF for Arctic indigenous women's FS and the dynamic nature of FS in this population.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIndigenous Studies and Ecology→French-language works237,207→