MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052331448 · doi:10.1177/1744987109360651

Social paediatrics: creating organisational processes and practices to foster health care access for children ‘at risk’

2010· article· en· W2052331448 on OpenAlexafffundabout
M. Judith Lynam, Christine Loock, Lorine Scott, Sabrina M. Wong, Valerie J. Munroe, Becky Palmer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of research in nursing · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicChild and Adolescent Health
Canadian institutionsVancouver Coastal HealthBC Children's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia Hospital
FundersCanadian Nurses Foundation
KeywordsGeneral partnershipHealth careNursingMedicineEarly childhoodSocial determinants of healthPublic relationsPublic healthPsychologyEconomic growthPolitical scienceDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years understanding and addressing child health inequities has become a priority for research and practice. In this paper we share research insights on an approach that shows promise for engaging across the spectrum of health services to foster access to services and supports for child development to reduce child health inequities. As pathways of influence on children’s health and development extend beyond the biomedical domain new approaches to practice are needed to foster health care access and to mobilise needed supports. The Social Paediatrics Initiative has been introduced in one of Canada’s poorest inner city neighbourhoods where a disproportionate number of children experience adverse childhood events and enter school developmentally delayed. The research was undertaken in partnership with practitioners, community based organisations and the formal health services sector. The study gathered data from parents, community members and clinicians to understand the range of conditions that interfere with access to health care and to illustrate the ways the Social Paediatrics Initiative sought to foster access and provide care that was responsive to the health and developmental needs of children at risk because of their social and material circumstances. In particular we illustrate ways in which intersectoral and interdisciplinary partnerships enabled clinicians to provide needed supports to address the social determinants of health.

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 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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.108
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.156
GPT teacher head0.597
Teacher spread0.441 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations18
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of research in nursingSame topicChild and Adolescent HealthFrench-language works237,207