Nurse-Family Partnership and Geography: An Intersectional Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nurse-Family Partnership is a targeted public health intervention program designed to improve child and maternal health through nurse home visiting. In the context of a process evaluation, we posed the question: "In what ways do Canadian public health nurses explain their experiences with delivering this program across different geographical environments?" The qualitative methodology of interpretive description guided study decisions and data were collected through 10 focus groups with 50 nurses conducted over 2 years. We applied an intersectionality lens to explore the influence of all types of geography on the delivery of Nurse-Family Partnership. The findings from our analysis suggest that the nature of clients' place and their associated social and physical geography emphasizes inadequacies of organizational and support structures that create health inequities for clients. Geography had a significant impact on program delivery for clients who were living with multiple forms of oppression and it worked to reinforce disadvantage.
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 | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.023 | 0.046 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.018 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".