MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2289164889

Parenting and child adjustment in immigrant and refugee children: A systematic review

2015· review· en· W2289164889 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Kimberly Hsiung

Bibliographic record

VenueuO Research (University of Ottawa) · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFamily Support in Illness
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsRefugeeImmigrationContext (archaeology)CommissionAnxietyPolitical sciencePsychologySystematic reviewGeographyPsychiatryMEDLINE
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

According to the UN High Commission for Refugees, there are approximately 11 million refugees in the world, and this number keeps increasing. Canada and Australia are among the top three resettlement countries in the world, which is reflected in the fact that 1 in 5 Canadians and 1 in 4 Australians originated from another country. These statistics highlight the prominence of international migration and a greater need to support these populations. This review investigates studies that have examined: 1) immigrant and refugee children's adjustment (emotional problems, behaviour, and academic achievement); 2) parental adjustment (depression, anxiety, or PTSD); and 3) styles of parenting and the parent-child relationship. This is a growing area of research that has not yet been summarized in a systematic review. As part of a Canadian team, in collaboration with an Australian team, we reviewed the research in this area. This review seeks to provide a better understanding of family adjustment within the immigrant and refugee context to inform the development of parent support programs. .Conclusion Our search yielded many articles to examine. Approximately one in ten articles met our criteria, so we have identified a large number of studies addressing the issue of family adjustment. We have identified 153 articles to be analyzed, 34 articles to be used as resources, and 490 articles that may be included in the study but need to be reviewed further. From this large wealth of articles, we will have a thorough understanding of recent research conducted on immigrant and refugee family adjustment. In reviewing the articles, it was essential to have a clear coding manual, as this reduced ambiguity. The importance of having a team was highlighted when resolving questions about coding and clarifying coding rules. The studies included populations from a wide range of countries in South America, the Former Soviet Union, the Middle East, Africa, and Asia. In addition to having a diverse background, immigrants and refugees were also adjusting to life in a variety of host countries from North America, Australia, Europe, and Israel. We found that the majority of the articles were quantitative rather than qualitative and focused on immigrant populations. A very small number of articles examined interventions in this population, indicating an area for further research.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.005
Bibliometrics0.0070.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueuO Research (University of Ottawa)Same topicFamily Support in IllnessFrench-language works237,207