Voices from the community: Developing effective community programs to support pregnant and early parenting women who use alcohol and other substances
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since the 1990s, many communities in Canada have worked to develop specialized programs to meet the needs of pregnant and early parenting women who use alcohol and other substances. These programs provide a range of services under one roof (a “single-access” or “one-stop shop” model), address women’s needs from a holistic perspective, provide practical and emotional support, and strive to reduce barriers to accessing care and support. Over the years, these programs have trialed new approaches to working with indigenous and non-indigenous women, their families, and their communities. In this paper, we describe the development of single-access programs in four different communities in Canada, discuss some of the elements of what makes these programs successful, and share our "lessons learned" over the years. We use examples from four different programs, including the Maxxine Wright Place Project in Surrey, BC; the Healthy, Empowered, Resilient (H.E.R) Pregnancy Program in Edmonton, AB; HerWay Home in Victoria, BC; and Manito Ikwe Kagiikwe in Winnipeg, MB. All four programs are based upon the "best practices" elements of: (1) engagement and outreach, (2) harm reduction, (3) cultural safety (4) supporting mother and child, and (5) partnerships. In addition to serving First Nations, Métis, Inuit and other indigenous women and their families, these programs have drawn upon indigenous knowledge in their program design, values, and philosophy and have collaborated with indigenous women in evaluation and research to track the successes of these programs and to improve service delivery.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".