MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Health Promotion and Participatory Action Research with South Asian Women

2002· article· en· W2042884277 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nursing Scholarship · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicParticipatory Visual Research Methods
Canadian institutionsToronto and Region Conservation AuthorityUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParticipatory action researchHealth promotionFocus groupCitizen journalismQualitative researchReflexivityPhotovoiceAction researchQualitative propertyHealth educationCommunity-based participatory researchSociologyGender studiesPublic relationsPublic healthPsychologyPolitical scienceNursingMedicinePedagogySocial scienceEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To examine South Asian immigrant women's health promotion issues and to facilitate the creation of emancipatory knowledge and self-understanding regarding health-promoting practices; to promote health education and mobilization for culturally relevant action. METHOD: The study was based on critical social theory; the research model was participatory action research (PAR). Two groups of South Asian women (women from India and of Indian origin) who had immigrated to Canada participated in the project. The qualitative data were generated through focus groups. Reflexive and dialectical critique were used as methods of analyzing qualitative data. The data were interpreted through reiterative process, and dominant themes were identified. FINDINGS: Three themes that were extracted from the data were: (a) the importance of maintaining culture and tradition, (b) placing family needs before self, and (c) surviving by being strong. An issue for action was the risk of intergenerational conflicts leading to alienation of family members. Over a period of 3 years, the following action plans were carried out: (a) workshops for parents and children, (b) sharing of project findings with the community, and (c) a presentation at an annual public health conference. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: The project activities empowered participants to create and share knowledge, which was then applied toward action for change. Health and health promotion were viewed as functions of the women's relationships to the world around them.

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)0.028
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.654
Threshold uncertainty score0.984

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0280.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.912
GPT teacher head0.703
Teacher spread0.209 · 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