MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2898568502 · doi:10.2196/10337

Health Disparities and Converging Epidemics in Jail Populations: Protocol for a Mixed-Methods Study

2018· article· en· W2898568502 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Robert T. Trotter, Ricky Camplain, Emery R. Eaves, Viacheslav Y. Fofanov, Natalia Dmitrieva, Crystal M. Hepp, Meghan Warren, Brianna A Barrios, Nicole Pagel, Alyssa B. Mayer, Julie A. Baldwin

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute on Minority Health and Health DisparitiesNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsPrisonPrison populationHealth equityHealth carePopulationProtocol (science)MedicineGerontologyPsychologyEnvironmental healthPublic healthCriminologyPolitical scienceAlternative medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Incarcerated populations have increased in the last 20 years and >12 million individuals cycle in and out of jails each year. Previous research has predominately focused on the prison population. However, a substantial gap exists in understanding the health, well-being, and health care utilization patterns in jail populations. OBJECTIVE: This pilot study has 5 main objectives: (1) define recidivists of the jail system, individuals characterized by high incarceration rates; (2) describe and compare the demographic and clinical characteristics of incarcerated individuals; (3) identify jail-associated health disparities; (4) estimate associations between incarceration and health; and (5) describe model patterns in health care and jail utilization. METHODS: The project has two processes-a secondary data analysis and primary data collection-which includes a cross-sectional health survey and biological sample collection to investigate infectious disease characteristics of the jail population. This protocol contains pilot elements in four areas: (1) instrument validity and reliability; (2) individual item assessment; (3) proof of concept of content and database accessibility; and (4) pilot test of the "honest broker" system. Secondary data analysis includes the analysis of 6 distinct databases, each covered by a formal memorandum of agreement between Northern Arizona University and the designated institution: (1) the Superior Court of Arizona Public Case Finder database; (2) North Country Health Care; (3) Health Choice Integrated Care; (4) Criminal Justice Information Services; (5) Correctional Electronic Medical Records; and (6) iLEADS. We will perform data integration processes using an automated honest broker design. We will administer a cross-sectional health survey, which includes questions about health status, health history, health care utilization, substance use practices, physical activity, adverse childhood events, and behavioral health, among 200 Coconino County Detention Facility inmates. Concurrent with the survey administration, we will collect Methicillin-resistant and Methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus (samples from the nose) and dental microbiome (Streptococcus sobrinus and Streptococcus mutans samples from the mouth) from consenting participants. RESULTS: To date, we have permission to link data across acquired databases. We have initiated data transfer, protection, and initial assessment of the 6 secondary databases. Of 199 inmates consented and enrolled, we have permission from 97.0% (193/199) to access and link electronic medical and incarceration records to their survey responses, and 95.0% (189/199) of interviewed inmates have given nasal and buccal swabs for analysis of S. aureus and the dental microbiome. CONCLUSIONS: This study is designed to increase the understanding of health needs and health care utilization patterns among jail populations, with a special emphasis on frequently incarcerated individuals. Our findings will help identify intervention points throughout the criminal justice and health care systems to improve health and reduce health disparities among jail inmates. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR1-10.2196/10337.

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)0.065
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.063
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.343

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0650.063
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.005
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0070.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0060.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0840.012

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 head0.510
GPT teacher head0.708
Teacher spread0.198 · 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
GenreProtocol

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

Citations25
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicCriminal Justice and Corrections AnalysisFrench-language works237,207