MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Fostering excellence: development of a course to prepare graduate students for research on migration and health

2012· review· en· W1832716500 on OpenAlexaffabout
Linda Ogilvie, Gina Higginbottom, Elizabeth Burgess‐Pinto, Christina Murray

Bibliographic record

VenueNursing Inquiry · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMigration, Health and Trauma
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward IslandMacEwan UniversityUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationExcellenceSociologyRefugeeSituatedContext (archaeology)PedagogyCompetence (human resources)Medical educationPolitical sciencePublic relationsPsychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada is an immigrant-receiving nation and many graduate students in nursing and other disciplines pursue immigrant health research. As these students often start with inadequate understanding of the policy, theoretical, and research contexts in which their work should be situated, we became concerned that the theses and dissertations were less sophisticated than were both possible and desirable. This led to development of a PhD-level course titled Migration and Health in the Canadian Context. In this study, we provide an analytic overview including course description, objectives, assignments, and specific class topics. Areas of focus include historical and theoretical considerations; determinants of immigrant health; refugee health; cultural competence and cultural safety; research challenges, approaches, and skills; policy-relevant research; and educational imperatives in the health and related disciplines. Salient research is introduced in each of these classes. While Canada is the main focus, comparative data are provided and there is relevance for nurse-researchers in other immigrant-receiving countries.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.003

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 head0.703
GPT teacher head0.630
Teacher spread0.073 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNursing InquirySame topicMigration, Health and TraumaFrench-language works237,207