Towards abundant intelligences: Considerations for Indigenous perspectives in adopting artificial intelligence technology
Open accessAbstract
Artificial Intelligence (AI) applications in healthcare are evolving rapidly. The integration of AI into the Canadian healthcare system has demonstrated significant potential for enhancing the efficiency of care and improving patient outcomes. However, as this transformative technology continues to advance, it is crucial to take into account the unique perspectives and requirements of Indigenous Peoples in Canada. This article delves into the political, ethical, and practical considerations associated with introducing AI into Indigenous healthcare, emphasizing the paramount importance of equity and inclusion, which are rooted in the Two-Eyed AI framework. It also underscores the significance of co-creating AI technology in collaboration with Indigenous communities and multidisciplinary development teams. To illustrate these principles, this article spotlights an international AI epistemology-focused working group example. Healthcare professionals who engage with AI, whether it be through research, management, development, or leadership are implicated with this contemporary paradigm shift in decolonizing novel AI technology.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the Abundant Intelligences initiative, refusal, not reform, is posed as a necessary stance.
“In this context, refusal, not reform, is posed as a necessary stance.”
From Towards a decolonial AI sovereignty model for indigenous educational settings (2026) · cites this paper as Silano, 2024
The Introduction’s case study describes the Abundant Intelligences project as integrating Indigenous knowledge into mainstream AI through community engagement and co-creation. The Conclusion likewise advocates incorporating Indigenous perspectives into AI development and policy. These passages propose changing how AI is developed, rather than posing refusal instead of reform as necessary; page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.83)
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe Abundant Intelligences initiative is a six-year (2023-2029), Indigenous-led international research programme reframing AI through Indigenous knowledge systems.
“The Abundant Intelligences initiative is a six-year (2023-2029), Indigenous-led international research programme reframing AI through Indigenous knowledge systems (Lewis et al., 2024;Silano, 2024).”
From Towards a decolonial AI sovereignty model for indigenous educational settings (2026) · cites this paper as Silano, 2024
The Introduction’s case-study Background describes the Abundant Intelligences Project as an ongoing, internationally collaborative project with primarily Indigenous investigators and collaborators that aims to make AI more inclusive of Indigenous perspectives. The case-study Strengths section describes its integration of Indigenous knowledge into AI research. Neither section establishes a six-year programme running from 2023 to 2029. (LLM, conf=0.87)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe Abundant Intelligences initiative exemplifies refusal at a governance level, rejecting optimisation logics in favour of ceremonial and relational protocols as design foundations.
“The Abundant Intelligences initiative exemplifies refusal at a governance level, rejecting optimisation logics in favour of ceremonial and relational protocols as design foundations (Lewis et al., 2024;Silano, 2024).”
From Towards a decolonial AI sovereignty model for indigenous educational settings (2026) · cites this paper as Silano, 2024
The case-study section describes the Abundant Intelligences project as community-engaged and relational, and says culturally sensitive AI may challenge efficiency and optimization norms. The health-leadership section also describes pods that can include talking circles and smudge ceremonies. Neither section establishes that the initiative practises refusal at a governance level or adopts ceremonial protocols as design foundations; the paper presents governance oversight as a recommendation for health leaders. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Dissecting racial bias in an algorithm used to manage the health of populations
Obermeyer, Z., Powers, B., Vogeli, C., & Mullainathan, S. (2019) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aax2342 · Cited by 7,137 · cited 1× · see citing works
“29 Moreover, including Indigenous imaginaries respects the fundamental principles of sovereignty and self-determination, 16 ensuring that AI technology aligns with the community ’ s values and priorities.”
BackgroundRaji, I. D., Smart, A., White, R. N., Mitchell, M., Gebru, T., Hutchinson, B., Smith-Loud, J., Theron, D., & Barnes, P. (2020) · Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency · doi:10.1145/3351095.3372873 · Cited by 1,372 · cited 1× · see citing works
“38 Such tools can enable development teams to assess how an AI model performs under various conditions, including its effectiveness across diverse human health datasets.”
BackgroundBias in AI-based models for medical applications: challenges and mitigation strategies
Mittermaier, M., Raza, M. M., & Kvedar, J. C. (2023) · npj Digital Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41746-023-00858-z · Cited by 372 · cited 1× · see citing works
“14,15 For example, algorithms employed by prominent health systems have exhibited racial bias for marginalized populations, including Black, 16 LGBTQ2S+, Asian, 17 and Indigenous populations.”
BackgroundWong, A.-K. I., Charpignon, M., Kim, H., Josef, C., de Hond, A. A. H., Fojas, J. J., Tabaie, A., Liu, X., Mireles-Cabodevila, E., Carvalho, L., et al. (2021) · JAMA Network Open · doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.31674 · Cited by 268 · see citing works
Raji, I. D., Smart, A., White, R. N., Mitchell, M., Gebru, T., Hutchinson, B., Smith-Loud, J., Theron, D., & Barnes, P. (2020) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2001.00973 · Cited by 179 · see citing works
Advancing health equity with artificial intelligence
Thomasian, N. M., Eickhoff, C., & Adashi, E. Y. (2021) · Journal of Public Health Policy · doi:10.1057/s41271-021-00319-5 · Cited by 117 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 22
- [1]Naik N Hameed BM Shetty DK et al. Legal and ethical consideration in artificial intelligence in healthcare: who takes responsibility? Front Surg. 2022; 9: 862322. 35360424 PMC8963864
- [2]Darcel K Upshaw T Craig-Neil A, et al. Implementing artificial intelligence in Canadian primary care: barriers and strategies identified through a national deliberative dialogue. PLoS One. 2023; 18(2): e0281733. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0281733 36848339 PMC9970060 · DOI
- [3]Henderson B Flood C Scassa T. Number. Technology-Facilitated gender-based violence article 10 1-2022 Artificial intelligence in Canadian healthcare: will the law protect us from algorithmic bias resulting in discrimination? Canadian Journal of Law and Technology Canadian Journal of Law and Technology. 2022; 19: 2- 475. https://digitalcommons.schulichlaw.dal.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1282&context=cjlt
- [4]Kim PJ. Social determinants of health inequities in indigenous Canadians through a life course approach to colonialism and the residential school system. Health Equity. 2019; 3(1): 378- 381. doi: 10.1089/heq.2019.0041 31346558 PMC6657289 · DOI
- [5]Cook K. The psychology of silicon valley. Springer International Publishing; 2020; 12- 14. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-27364-4 · DOI
- [6]Brandusescu A. Artificial intelligence policy and funding in Canada: public investments, private interests. SSRN Journal. 2021: 17- 41. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.4089932 · DOI
- [12]Jiménez A. The Silicon doctrine. tripleC. 2020; 18(1): 322- 336. doi: 10.31269/triplec.v18i1.1147 · DOI
- [13]Cheney J. Postmodern environmental ethics: ethics of bioregional narrative. Environ Ethics. 1989; 11(2): 117- 134.
- [15]Panch T Mattie H Atun R. Artificial intelligence and algorithmic bias: implications for health systems. J Glob Health. 2019; 9(2): 010318. doi: 10.7189/jogh.09.020318 PMC6875681 31788229 · DOI · Paper page
- [18]Comeau D Johnson C Bouhamdani N. Review of current 2SLGBTQIA+ inequities in the Canadian health care system. Front Public Health. 2023; 11: 1183284. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1183284 37533535 PMC10392841 · DOI
- [20]Lewis JE. Indigenous protocol and artificial intelligence workshops position paper. Indigenous Protocol and Artificial Intelligence Indigenous Protocol and Artificial Intelligence Working Group Honolulu, Hawai’i. Montreal, QC: Concordia University; 2020. doi: 10.11573/spectrum.library.concordia.ca.00986506 · DOI · Paper page
- [22]Lewis JE Arista N Pechawis A Kite S. Making kin with the machines. J Des Sci. 2018: 4- 10. doi: 10.21428/bfafd97b · DOI
- [25]Stahl BC. Responsible innovation ecosystems: ethical implications of the application of the ecosystem concept to artificial intelligence. Int J Inf Manag. 2022; 62: 102441. doi: 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102441. · DOI
- [26]Iwama M Marshall M Marshall A, et al. Two-eyed seeing and the language of healing in community-based research. Can J Native Educ. 2009; 32(2). doi: 10.14288/cjne.v32i2.196493 · DOI
- [31]Glauser W. AI in health care: improving outcomes or threatening equity? Can Med Assoc J. 2020; 192(1): E21- E22. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.1095838 31907237 PMC6944301 · DOI
- [32]Munn L. The uselessness of AI ethics. AI Ethics. 2022; 3(3): 869- 877. doi: 10.1007/s43681-022-00209-w · DOI
- [34]Munn L. The five tests: designing and evaluating AI according to indigenous Māori principles. AI & Society; 2023: 6- 9. doi: 10.1007/s00146-023-01636-x · DOI
- [37]I Scheim A Jackson R James L Sharp Dopler T Pyne J R Bauer G. Barriers to well-being for aboriginal gender-diverse people: results from the trans PULSE project in Ontario, Canada. Ethnicity and Inequalities in Health and Social Care. 2013; 6(4): 108- 120. doi: 10.1108/eihsc-08-2013-0010 · DOI
- [40]Shams RA Zowghi D Bano M. AI and the quest for diversity and inclusion: a systematic literature review. AI Ethics. 2023: 4. doi: 10.1007/s43681-023-00362-w · DOI
- [41]Herzog LS Wright SR Pennington JJ Richardson L. The KAIROS blanket exercise: engaging Indigenous ways of knowing to foster critical consciousness in medical education. Med Teach. 2021; 43: 1437- 1443. doi: 10.1080/0142159x.2021.1956679 34369238 · DOI
- [43]Hunt SC Young NL. Blending indigenous sharing circle and western focus group methodologies for the study of indigenous children’s health: a systematic review. Int J Qual Methods. 2021; 20: 160940692110151. doi: 10.1177/16094069211015112 · DOI
- [44]McGibbon E. Truth and reconciliation: healthcare organizational leadership. Healthc Manag Forum. 2018; 32(1): 20- 24. doi: 10.1177/0840470418803379 30514125 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Towards a decolonial AI sovereignty model for indigenous educational settings
Mbah, M. F., & Jarvis, L. (2026) · Cogent Education · doi:10.1080/2331186x.2026.2626631 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
- Authors
- Silano, J. A.
- Affiliations
- Toronto Metropolitan University (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Julia A. Silano
- ORCID
- Julia A. Silano
- Venue
- Healthcare Management Forum
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2024-06-03
- Volume
- 37
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 329-333
- ISSN
- 0840-4704 (ISSN-L)
- 2352-3883
- PMC
- PMC11348629
- OpenAlex
- W4399325713
- Cited by
- 12
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2026: 11 · 2025: 1
- FWCI
- 5.44
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Locations
- Healthcare Management Forum (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Health › Indigenous Health, Education, and Rights
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
- Keywords
- artificial intelligence in healthcare, indigenous peoples, decolonization, Indigenous health equity, AI ethics, epistemology of AI, Canadian health care system
- MeSH terms
- Indigenous Peoples, Artificial Intelligence, Canada, Health Services, Indigenous, Humans
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
