MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1586192950 · doi:10.1093/pch/10.7.375

A Canada Fit for Children is an essential tool for child and youth health care givers

2005· article· en· W1586192950 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Christoph Walker, Landon C Pearson

Notice bibliographique

RevuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2005
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineHealth Professions
ThématiqueChild and Adolescent Health
Établissements canadiensCanada Council for the ArtsCanadian Paediatric SocietyUniversity of Ottawa
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésChild healthPsychologyMedicineFamily medicineDevelopmental psychology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

In 1991, Canada ratified the United Nations (UN) Convention on the Rights of Children. Subsequently, in 2002, the UN held a Special Session on Children where the nations of the world, including Canada, undertook to create “A World Fit for Children” (1). Although generally regarded as one of the world's most successful countries, Canada poses its share of problems for those trying to grow up happy and healthy. According to Campaign 2000 (2), although Canada's child poverty rate decreased from 21.1% in 1996 to 14.9% in 2001, it rose again in 2002 to 15.6%, representing approximately one in six, or 1,065,000, Canadian children. In its 2003 report (3) on Canada's progress on children's rights, the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child expressed concern that the best interests of the child are still not given priority in Canadian law and court decisions. Of particular concern to that Committee was Section 43 (s.43) of the Criminal Code of Canada, which provides a legal defence for parents who hit a child as a form of ‘discipline’ (notwithstanding the UN Committee's concern, the constitutionality of s.43 was upheld in 2004 by the Supreme Court of Canada, although the Court did significantly reduce its application [4]). Also, paediatricians throughout Canada know well the continuing high frequency of injuries, maltreatment, mental health problems, childhood obesity and inequities in the health status of our Aboriginal children and youth, as well as other populations. In April 2004, Senator Landon Pearson submitted A Canada Fit for Children: Canada's Plan of Action in Response to the May 2002 United Nations Special Session on Children (5) to the UN in New York on behalf of the Government of Canada. This national plan of action was produced with the assistance of Canadians from every sector of society, including submissions and responses from the Canadian Paediatric Society (CPS). The action plan is an official Government of Canada document, framed by the UN Convention on the Rights of Children and developed as a response to the 2002 UN Special Session on Children. Canadian physicians and others who work with children and youth might be forgiven if their initial response were to be that this document would have little to do with their front-line work. However, A Canada Fit for Children is not just a government document – it is designed to be used as a basis for collaborative action by all who work with or care for children and youth. Therefore, we suggest that every child and youth health professional has something to learn from A Canada Fit for Children and, moreover, that all who advocate for improved health for children and youth now have an important resource to support their advocacy. A Canada Fit for Children presents priorities for collaborative action to improve the well-being of children in Canada (and abroad), themes that were confirmed by extensive consultations with Canadians: enhancing early child development; supporting parents and strengthening families; improving income security for families; providing early and continuous learning experiences; promoting healthy adolescent development; and creating safe, supportive and violence-free communities. The breadth and depth of coverage of health issues will surprise many readers – this document speaks eloquently to many health issues of Canadian children and youth in which the CPS has been an active advocate. Physicians working with children and youth, be they family physicians, paediatricians or subspecialists, will find their interests and concerns well represented in the plan of action. Paragraph 35 speaks to public health, 36 to health funding, 37 to tobacco control, and 38 to the environment, allergy and safety. There are several paragraphs on the health of First Nations and Inuit children, on poverty, on children with disabilities, on healthy active living and on mental health. The priorities for action for Canadian children include the following: healthy active living, mental health, immunization, injury prevention, sexual health, tobacco and drug use, Aboriginal children, health care and research, language minorities and, later in the document, child maltreatment – all of which have been considered priorities for CPS advocacy. The priorities do not end with Canada; there is excellent information to help those working with children and youth overseas, too. We urge Canadian physicians and others working with children to take a look at and use A Canada Fit for Children. We all share responsibility for the health of our young citizens, and resolving their many pressing health issues requires broad partnerships of health professionals, parents, voluntary agencies, health and social services, and governments at all levels. This document should serve as a call to action not only to the federal government (whom we should certainly press to implement those sections that relate to its jurisdiction!) but to all of us, to work together so that Canadian children and youth can truly live in “a Canada fit for children”. “A World Fit for Children” can be found as the Annex to Resolution S27/2 in the General Assembly Official Records twenty-seventh special session, supplement No 3 (A/S-27/19/Rev.1) at (Version current at August 19, 2005). We the Children: Meeting the promises of the World Summit for Children can be found at (Version current at August 19, 2005). A Canada Fit for Children can be found at (English) and (French) (Version current at August 19, 2005).

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,003
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Commentaire · Signal consensuel: Commentaire
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,973
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,262

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0030,008
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0220,004
Communication savante0,0050,003
Science ouverte0,0020,010
Intégrité de la recherche0,0030,007
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0350,006

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,022
Tête enseignante GPT0,334
Écart entre enseignants0,312 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreCommentaire

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2005
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revuePaediatrics & Child Health→Même sujetChild and Adolescent Health→Travaux en français237 207→