MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2802886505 · doi:10.1093/eurpub/cky048.017

1.10-P19Adoption of guidelines concerning medical examinations on arrival for asylum seekers and refugees: systematic review of the literature and proposals for an implementation plan in Italy

2018· article· en· W2802886505 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
S Roveta, Emilio Di Maria

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Public Health · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMigration, Health and Trauma
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRefugeePlan (archaeology)MedicinePolitical scienceLibrary scienceFamily medicineHistoryComputer scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A joint programme of the National Institute for Health, Migration and Poverty (INMP), the Istituto Superiore di Sanità (ISS) and the Italian Society for Migration Medicine (SIMM) recently produced the guidelines “Medical examinations on arrival and protection pathways for migrants hosted at reception centres”. The Guidelines are intended to provide evidence-based recommendations to decision-makers and health care providers about appropriate health care pathways for asylum seekers on arrival in Italy and during the phases of hospitality. In order for the guidelines to be translated into current practice, local health care systems should adopt the recommendations through a proper implementation plan. The objective of the present work is to build a set of knowledge-based interventions to be implemented at the regional and local level. For this purpose, the PRISMA guidelines were followed to produce a systematic review of existing implementation models for recommendations concerning health care procedures in asylum seekers and refugees. We searched PubMed and Cochrane databases. Grey literature and documents provided by key opinion leaders were also examined. Though several guidelines focusing on asylum seekers are available, the systematic review found few thorough models for implementation. The programme developed by the Canadian Collaboration for Immigrant and Refugee Health is worth noting as a comprehensive line of action. Based on available suggestions, we designed a preliminary set of educational interventions to facilitate the dissemination phase among general practitioners and medical students. Educational programmes will be extended to all professionals involved along the health care pathway. Furthermore, we outlined a plan to monitor formal acts released at the regional and hospital level. According to the results from the systematic review, we can conclude that there is a need for knowledge-based models aimed at facilitating the effective adoption of recommended procedures for asylum seekers and refugees.

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)0.048
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.122
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 score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.252

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0480.122
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.010
Bibliometrics0.0200.016
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.001

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 head0.132
GPT teacher head0.452
Teacher spread0.320 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Public Health→Same topicMigration, Health and Trauma→French-language works237,207→