Characteristics of Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander Community Health Worker Programs: A Systematic Review
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Community health workers (CHWs) are frontline health workers who often serve socially and linguistically isolated populations, including Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander (AA and NHPI) communities in the United States (U.S.) and U.S. territories. We conducted a systematic review of the peer-reviewed literature to assess the characteristics of CHW programs for AA and NHPI communities in the U.S. and U.S. territories, generating a total of 75 articles. Articles were coded using eight domains: ethnic group, health topic, geographic location, funding mechanism, type of analysis reported, prevention/management focus, CHW role, and CHW title. Articles describing results of an intervention or program evaluation, or cost-effectiveness analysis were further coded with seven domains: study design, intervention recruitment and delivery site, mode of intervention delivery, outcomes assessed, key findings, and positive impact. Results revealed gaps in the current literature and point towards recommendations for future CHW research, program, and policy efforts.
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 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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it