MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038147254 · doi:10.4102/curationis.v29i1.1036

The use of PHC clinic-based women’s groups for financial empowerment in a rural area

2006· article· en· W2038147254 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCurationis · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEmployment and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmpowermentRural areaNursingSocioeconomicsPsychologyBusinessMedicineEconomic growthSociologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article is based on a four-year project during which Primary Health Care (PHC) nurses worked with women's groups in their areas. The aim of the study was to explore the involvement of PHC nurses in economic empowerment, both in terms of health promotion and in terms of the PHC approach. In particular the objectives were to establish whether nurses could lead economic empowerment groups, whether such groups could establish adequate external links and become financially viable. Eleven groups were used as case studies, and a cross-case analysis was done in terms of the three objectives. It was found that between the women and the nurses, adequate leadership existed for the groups to function well. Very limited external linkages were established, notwithstanding efforts in this regard. Nine out of 11 groups contributed to financial welfare of their members after 18 months, but a range of problems with regard to financial viability are identified.

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.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.154
Threshold uncertainty score0.649

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.298 · 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