Health Promotion and Participatory Action Research with South Asian Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
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 | 0.039 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".