MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W219585443 · doi:10.1093/pch/12.8.645

A Canada (un)fit for children?

2007· article· en· W219585443 on OpenAlexaffabout
H. Guyda, Robin Williams

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicChild and Adolescent Health
Canadian institutionsRegional Municipality of NiagaraMcGill UniversityMcMaster UniversityMontreal Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPovertyChild povertyProsperityRatificationPopulationStandard of livingConvention on the Rights of the ChildEconomic growthPolitical scienceDeclarationMedicineDevelopment economicsEconomicsEnvironmental healthPoliticsHuman rightsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As you will read in this issue of Paediatrics & Child Health, Canada's federal House of Commons voted unanimously in 1989 to “seek to achieve the goal” of ending child poverty by the year 2000. We are far past this optimistic declaration date. Since then, in spite of unprecedented prosperity and economic wealth as a nation, and despite several further promises such as the ratification of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (1), and A Canada Fit for Children (2), we still find one in six of our Canadian children living in poverty, increasing to one in four in the Aboriginal population. In 1989, the child poverty rate was 15.1%, and in 2003, it had risen to 17.6%, representing 1.2 million children living in poverty. There is significant variability in child poverty rates, not only across the provinces, but also within certain communities (3). Furthermore, due to the different definitions of poverty, methods of measuring it and attempts at international comparisons, the statistical story can appear varied and confusing. However, Canada's ranking of 19 out of 26 successful Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development countries in terms of the ‘percentage of children living in relative poverty’ is shameful (4). In this special issue of Paediatrics & Child Health, we bring together a series of articles that will hopefully arm paediatricians and primary care practitioners with a broader understanding of the real face of child poverty in Canada, including the incidence, demographics, health and social impacts, as well as some special Canadian features. Further, we have optimistically presented some pathways for possible solutions (Ferguson et al, pages 701–706). The poignant article by National Chief Phil Fontaine (pages 653–655) is a must read. His description of what lies behind poverty in the Aboriginal communities is very clear. Our current laws and policies, which are rooted historically in the belief that European culture was somehow superior to the Aboriginal culture, are significantly harming Canada's Aboriginal children because of the resultant sustained economic gap. The National Chief's call to action for his communities must be addressed urgently. Poor children interface with clinicians more frequently than children from families of higher economic status, and poverty is a predictor of increased rates of most negative health outcomes. The increased rates of infant mortality, low birth weights, asthma, obesity, functional disabilities, poor literacy, poor school readiness, and behavioural and mental health difficulties all bring these children into repeated contact with the health care system (Gupta et al, pages 667–672). Furthermore, because the incidence of poverty is highest among our youngest children, the impact on their life successes, health and future well-being mediated through these early years is particularly critical. Paediatricians and primary care practitioners may witness the expression of poverty from a child or family point of view when it is presented uniquely in hospitals, clinical offices or communities. The families of the poor children that we see often reflect a special profile, including an increased likelihood of being a single mother, being a recent immigrant, coming from an Aboriginal family or having a disabled parent (Rothman, pages 661–665; Pagani, pages 693–697; Pagani and Huot, pages 698–700). Unfortunately, the actual level of poverty may not be recognized due to a lack of awareness or time constraints on the health care practitioner. Enhanced cultural sensitivity exposure in our training programs offers a potential approach to address this shortfall (Razack, pages 657–659). Clearly, poverty comes with considerable baggage and brings with it a significant panoply of negative events; childhood poverty limits their horizons, dreams and potentials. As is seen in the articles by Larson (pages 673–677), Gupta et al, and Pagani, the lifetime trajectory for children experiencing poverty is diminished and driven down so that other lifetime events of chronic illness, divorce, loss, etc, have enhanced traction in an already challenged environment. Without interventions and changes in our current direction, the cycle of ongoing poverty is inevitable. These interventions are particularly important during the prenatal and early years because this is the largest age group of children living in poverty. Our ability to continue to focus attention on child poverty and its impact requires ongoing measurement with creative data display and knowledge translation. The articles by Hertzman and Bertrand (pages 687–692), and Rothman, tell the real Canadian story and focus on the interface of poverty with the community. We believe that there is a clear policy and practice gap that exists between our ‘sincere’ pronouncement that ‘children are our most important asset’ and what we actually practice in Canada. We firmly believe that proffered solutions need to be comprehensive and broad, and must address equitable income distributions, fair wages, and family and child support. The solutions should also provide programs and services that strengthen the social support network, as well as investment in quality early learning and childcare, housing, education and training. In addition, individual and collective suggestions of how to participate in and address the child poverty issue are provided throughout this Journal issue (Lynk and Issenman, pages 649–650; Ferguson et al; and Fontaine). For example, the Bradshaw article (pages 681–685) describes the United Kingdom experience, where in 1999, their national government declared their aim to end child poverty. It describes their movement toward success through government leadership, broad-based commitment, establishment of realistic targets and ongoing measurement of outcomes. This special issue of Paediatrics & Child Health adds our voice to the international community of journals that will focus world attention on poverty (5); all of us are committed to targeting poverty as an international failure that needs immediate redress. We hope to entice you to stay connected to this critical social policy issue (page 651), and to become part of the solution in many ways, small or large, through the collective power of your voices, practices and leadership. Our challenge to all of you is that, when the media focus fades, we continue to push for the development of a realistic Canadian strategy, pulling together leaders, ideas, targets, timeframes and solutions from across this great country – including all levels of government – to make Canada a country that is truly fit for all of our children, irrespective of who they are or where they live. It is time to deal seriously with child poverty as a national issue. It deserves our national energy – there is no better time.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.376
Threshold uncertainty score0.757

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.004
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0090.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0330.007

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.326 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations1
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child HealthSame topicChild and Adolescent HealthFrench-language works237,207