Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to highlight gaps in the literature regarding transnational ties, the experience of raising and caring for children in a new (high-income) country and well-being, and to propose a program of research to address these gaps. Design/methodology/approach A general review of the literature on international migration, transnationalism and parenthood was conducted. A program of research and its objectives are then described. Findings To address research gaps, the proposed program of research aims to: develop approaches and tools to examine and measure the transnational experiences of migrant families; better understand migrants’ transnational obligations, resources and movements and their impact on parenthood and the health and well-being of families; assess whether existing health and social care and services for migrant families with children consider the transnational contexts and experiences of families; and determine how health and social care and services for migrant families with children may be adapted or developed to address transnational challenges and enhance transnational resources for families. Originality/value The proposed program of research offers a new approach, transnationalism, for producing knowledge toward better understanding the health and optimizing the care of migrant families in the context of raising and caring for children in a new country. It also contributes to the agenda setting regarding the approach and priority areas for research in migrant health.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".