MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3008175046 · doi:10.32350/ccpr.12.04

Providing Psychological Services to Immigrant Children: Challenges and Potential Solutions

2019· article· en· W3008175046 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sajjad Ahmad, Keith S. Dobson

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical and Counselling Psychology Review · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMigration, Health and Trauma
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryRoyal Society of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMulticulturalismImmigrationDiversity (politics)Settlement (finance)Mental healthInclusion (mineral)Face (sociological concept)Political scienceCultural diversityEconomic growthSociologyPublic relationsPsychologyBusinessGender studiesSocial scienceEconomicsPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada is a diverse and multicultural country. More than one fifth of Canadians are foreign-born individuals from over 200 countries (Statistics Canada, 2017a). Whereas diversity and official multiculturalism makes Canada attractive for immigrants, the newcomers nonetheless face challenges in the areas of settlement, employment, and access to mental health services. These challenges are particularly acute for immigrant children. This article describes four major challenges related to the provision of psychological services to immigrant children and suggests potential solutions for each of these four challenges. The article concludes with the suggestion of a multilevel approach to address these challenges, and the collaborative inclusion of relevant stakeholders.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.116

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.004
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0030.007
Research integrity0.0050.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.329 · 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
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
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical and Counselling Psychology ReviewSame topicMigration, Health and TraumaFrench-language works237,207