MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3025751694 · doi:10.1177/2158244020917957

Population Health Intervention Implementation Among Migrants With Precarious Status in Montreal: Underlying Theory and Key Challenges

2020· article· en· W3025751694 on OpenAlexaffabout
Loubna Belaid, M Benoit, Navdeep Kaur, Azari Lili, Valéry Ridde

Bibliographic record

VenueSAGE Open · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMigration, Health and Trauma
Canadian institutionsCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-MontréalUniversité de MontréalMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)Health carePublic healthNursingKey (lock)Public relationsPsychologyMedicineGerontologyPolitical scienceComputer securityComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study is to describe the underlying theory and the challenges involved in implementing an intervention to access health care services for migrants with precarious status (MPS) in Montreal. The description of the underlying theory of the intervention was based on a documentary analysis and a workshop with clinicians ( n = 9). The challenges were identified through concept mapping ( n = 28) and in-depth interviews ( n = 13). The results of the study indicated that the aims of the intervention were to provide access to health care to MPS primarily to avoid any further health status deterioration. The most significant challenges identified were sustainable funding resources and improved access to care and protection for MPS. The interviews indicated that MPS are difficult to reach out; public health care system rules are unclear; resource constraints make it difficult to provide adequate and continuing care; and advocacy activities are difficult to organize.

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)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.391
Threshold uncertainty score0.787

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0110.015
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0050.006
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.336 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAGE OpenSame topicMigration, Health and TraumaFrench-language works237,207