Newcomer families' experiences with programs and services to support early childhood development in Canada: A scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It can be difficult for families with young children to navigate early childhood development supports. In particular, newcomer families often encounter additional barriers and require resources, programs, and services that are tailored to their unique assets, experiences, and needs. We conducted a scoping review of the literature published between 2000 and 2019 to explore what is known about newcomer families’ experiences with programs and services to support early childhood development in Canada. We searched 12 databases, screened 2390 articles, and included 34 articles for synthesis and analysis. Three common and connected themes were identified: 1) effective intercultural understanding, responsiveness, and communication are critical to ensuring full access to meaningful programs and services; 2) some newcomer families face systemic barriers exacerbated by their immigration status, and; 3) feelings and perceptions of families and service providers, as well as social supports, networks, and relationships influence how programs and services are accessed and experienced. Our review identifies the requirement for additional, participatory research that centres the voices and perspectives of newcomer children and their families and the need to expand that research to less populated and rural areas of the country to inform meaningful and culturally relevant policies, programs, and services for newcomer families to support their children’s well-being.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".