MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Supporting African refugees in Canada: insights from a support intervention

2012· article· en· W1481994459 on OpenAlexaffabout
Moira Stewart, Laura Simich, Edward Shizha, Knox Makumbe, Edward Makwarimba

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth & Social Care in the Community · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMigration, Health and Trauma
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier UniversityUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRefugeeSomaliPeer supportIntervention (counseling)Psychological interventionSocial supportPsychologyEthnic groupThematic analysisQualitative researchNursingMedicineMedical educationSocial psychologySociologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although evidence suggests the importance of social support for refugees, this knowledge has not been invoked to systematically develop culturally congruent support interventions that help refugees adapt to life in receiving countries. The objective of this study was to design and pilot test a culturally congruent intervention that meets the support needs and preferences of two ethno-culturally distinct refugee groups. Support was delivered to Somali and Sudanese refugees (n = 58), by trained peer and professional facilitators. Face-to-face groups comprised of refugees, matched by gender and ethnicity, were created to enhance the depleted social networks of Somali and Sudanese refugees. Each peer support group met bi-weekly for a face-to-face session for 12 weeks. Peer facilitators delivered supplementary one-to-one support via the telephone. The ingredients of the support intervention included: (i) peer facilitators and professionals; (ii) provision of information, affirmation and emotional support; and (iii) accessibility (e.g. childcare, transportation). The study employed a qualitative participatory research design. Data collected for the study included (i) in-depth pre-intervention interviews with potential support group participants in 2008-2009 to assess intervention preferences; (ii) fieldnotes by peer and professional facilitators during the intervention in 2009-10; (iii) post-intervention group interviews with support group participants in 2010; and (iv) in-depth interviews with peer and professional helpers in 2010. A major perceived benefit of the support programme was connecting with people from African refugee participants' cultural communities. Participants appreciated the gender and culture-specific groups. Following the social support intervention, refugees reported increased social integration, decreased loneliness and expanded coping repertoire.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.448
Threshold uncertainty score0.575

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.348 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations92
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth & Social Care in the CommunitySame topicMigration, Health and TraumaFrench-language works237,207