MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2120986956 · doi:10.1177/1049732309344207

Participatory Action Research: Practical Strategies for Actively Engaging and Maintaining Participation in Immigrant and Refugee Communities

2009· article· en· W2120986956 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueQualitative Health Research · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCommunity Health and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParticipatory action researchRefugeeFocus groupEmpowermentImmigrationThematic analysisPublic relationsQualitative researchDiversity (politics)SociologyMental healthCitizen journalismAppealPsychologyPolitical scienceSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this research we examined the processes involved in implementing and maintaining a participatory action research (PAR) project by uncovering how theoretical PAR tenets hold up in the reality of a community-based project addressing immigrants' and refugees' mental health needs. Qualitative data from focus groups with these newcomers were analyzed for thematic content. Findings reveal that active participation is seen as the gateway into a PAR project, whereas knowledge attainment and empowerment are the stimuli for continued participation. The data also suggest that newcomers' motivations to participate in a PAR-oriented project might vary across ethno-cultural groups. Practitioners working in community-based initiatives would do well to appeal to the diversity of motivational factors, while endorsing individual and group strengths.

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)0.083
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0830.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.004
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 head0.921
GPT teacher head0.775
Teacher spread0.146 · 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