MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136450673 · doi:10.7202/006877ar

Quand migration et maternité se croisent : perspectives des intervenantes et des mères immigrantes

2003· article· fr· W2136450673 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Alex Battaglini, Sylvie Gravel, Laurence Boucheron, Michel Fournier, Jean‐Marc Brodeur, Carole Poulin, Suzanne DeBlois, Danielle Durand, Chantal Lefèbvre, Bernard Heneman

Bibliographic record

VenueService social · 2003
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Identity, and Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La naissance d'un enfant apporte dans chaque famille son lot de modifications significatives. Cette transition qui exige une adaptation importante est souvent associée à une plus grande vulnérabilité. Or, cette vulnérabilité peut être exacerbée par des circonstances particulières, dont celles qui découlent de l'expérience migratoire. Les équipes multidisciplinaires d'intervenantes peuvent-elles tenir compte de cette double réalité dans leur évaluation pour les services intégrés de soin de santé en périnatalité? Cette recherche a abordé ces questions en deux temps. D'abord par une étude exploratoire auprès de mères immigrantes (n = 91) en période périnatale afin d'explorer les relations entre les circonstances migratoires et les conditions de vie parentales, puis auprès d'intervenantes (n = 19) afin de saisir les facettes implicites du processus décisionnel qui les amène à diriger ou non vers la ressource appropriée une mère jugée vulnérable. Cette double perspective, complémentaire, propose un éclairage nouveau sur la dynamique particulière qui se dégage de l'expérience simultanée de la migration et de la maternité.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.009
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.293 · 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

Citations15
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueService socialSame topicMigration, Identity, and HealthFrench-language works237,207