A Canada Fit for Children is an essential tool for child and youth health care givers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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).
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.035 | 0.006 |
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".