MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Children and Families Seeking Asylum in Northern Norway: Living Conditions and Mental Health

2012· article· en· W2045697048 on OpenAlexaff
Camilla Lauritzen, Hilde Sivertsen

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Migration · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMigration, Health and Trauma
Canadian institutionsChild, Adolescent and Family Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthRefugeeImmigrationFocus groupAffect (linguistics)Qualitative researchPsychologyMental health careEnvironmental healthMedicinePsychiatryPolitical scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The mental health of children seeking asylum and their families is a somewhat neglected area of research. Research on refugee children and children living with adversities suggests that environmental factors are crucial in preventing mental health problems. In this study, we aim to identify central environmental conditions that affect the mental health of children living with their families at governmental asylum processing centres in northern Norway. This study has a qualitative design, and is based on 11 focus group interviews with the staff at asylum processing centres. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed focusing on important risk and protective factors for mental health problems presented by the informants. The results highlighted time spent at asylum centres and the parent's mental health as the most important risk factors. Schooling, activities, general living conditions and poor economy were also seen as crucial. The findings suggest that these children are indeed vulnerable, and at high risk of developing mental health problems. Their rights are, however, open to local interpretations, and they fall between two stools; their right to proper health care, and national and international immigration policies.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.200
Threshold uncertainty score0.397

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations24
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational MigrationSame topicMigration, Health and TraumaFrench-language works237,207