Building Safe Didactic Dialogues for Action Model: MobilizingCommunity with Micronesian Islanders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Despite mandates by the United States (U.S.) government to ensure the inclusion of women and minorities in federally funded research, communities of color continue to participate less frequently than non-Latinx Whites. There is limited research that examines maternal health outcomes and early childhood resources. Pacific Islanders (PI) have grown substantially in a county in the Pacific Northwest region of the U.S. (from 4,419 to 9,248, of which 52% are female). About 62.7% of PI women are not accessing prenatal care in the first trimester, and this is substantially higher than the national target of 22.1%. Researchers found that PI children are leaving school to take care of family obligations. The purpose of the educational innovative project, Building Safe Didactic Dialogues for Action model, was to respond to Micronesian Islanders (MI) parent leaders’ need to feel safe and to build a close kinship to encourage dialogue about difficult topics regarding access and utilization of early education systems and prenatal/perinatal health for community-driven model for action planning and solutions. Approach: Popular education tenets were used in the project to be culturally sensitive to the human experience. The MI community health worker outreached to MI parent leaders in an urban area in the Pacific Northwest region of the U.S. Eight partners participated in this project: parent leaders from the MI community-at-large, community partners from the MI Community organization, and academic nurse researchers. Didactic dialogues lasted two hours per session for four. Topics included: collaborative agreements, MI parent leaders’ identified needs and existing resources regarding preschool and immunization, parent–child relationship (stress and trauma, adverse childhood experiences), and MI experience regarding prenatal care access and postpartum depression. Group discussion on reflection was used to evaluate utility. Outcomes: Building Safe Didactic Dialogues for Action model was foundational via mobilizing community with MI, trust and rapport building, and engaging in a safe and courageous space for dialogues for action planning and solutions as community and academic partners as stakeholders. Conclusion: Many previously unspoken issues such as abuse, language, and cultural beliefs including barriers were openly shared among all partners. Dynamic thoughts towards identifying needs for change and then planning steps toward creating positive change created an atmosphere of empowerment for change.
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 | 0.013 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.019 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".