MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2754546427 · doi:10.4103/efh.efh_175_16

Using Maslow's hierarchy to highlight power imbalances between visiting health professional student volunteers and the host community: An applied qualitative study

2017· article· en· W2754546427 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

VenueEducation for Health · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Health and Surgery
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryMcMaster UniversityPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaslow's hierarchy of needsRespondentThematic analysisPsychologyHierarchySocial psychologyQualitative researchPublic relationsSociologySocial sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Health professional students from high-income countries increasingly participate in short-term experiences in global health (STEGH) conducted abroad. One common criticism of STEGH is the inherent power differential that exists between visiting learners and the local community. To highlight this power differential, this paper explores perceived benefits as described by volunteer and community respondents and applies Maslow's hierarchy of needs to commonly identified themes in each respondent group. METHODS: A semistructured survey was used to collect qualitative responses from both volunteers and community members located in a Dominican Republic community, that is, a hotspot for traditionally conducted STEGH. Thematic analysis identified themes of perceived benefits from both respondent groups; each group's common themes were then classified and compared within Maslow's hierarchy of needs. RESULTS: Each respondent group identified resource provision as a perceived benefit of STEGH, but volunteer respondents primarily focused on the provision of highly-skilled, complex resources while community respondents focused on basic necessities (food, water, etc.) Volunteer respondents were also the only group to also mention spiritual/religious/life experiences, personal skills development, and relationships as perceived benefits. Applying Maslow's hierarchy thus demonstrates a difference in needs: community respondents focused on benefits that address deficiency needs at the bottom of the hierarchy while volunteers focused on benefits addressing self-transcendence/actualization needs at the top of the hierarchy. CONCLUSIONS: The perceived difference in needs met by STEGH between volunteers and the host community within Maslow's hierarchy may drive an inherent power differential. Refocusing STEGH on the relationship level of the hierarchy (i.e., focusing on partnerships) might help mitigate this imbalance and empower host communities.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.500
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.529
Teacher spread0.438 · 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