MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3127785131 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-153591/v1

Understanding the Influence of Ghanaian Women’s Migration Patterns on Access to Health Care 

2021· preprint· en· W3127785131 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Michelle Malagón, Laiba Rizwan, Solina Richter

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square (Research Square) · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Workforce Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersWomen and Children's Health Research InstituteChildren's Health Research Institute
KeywordsSocioeconomic statusThematic analysisEmpowermentHealth careReproductive healthIntersectionalitySocial determinants of healthBusinessEconomic growthPolitical scienceDemographic economicsSocioeconomicsPopulationMedicinePsychologyQualitative researchEnvironmental healthSociologyGender studiesEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: In recent years, there has been a noted increase in migration rates with trends marking a rise in women seeking relocation as means to access employment or academic opportunities; this growth is referred to as the feminization of migration. Migration stimulates female empowerment, increases access to financial opportunities, and promotes cultural diversity; all while simultaneously exposing women to detrimental conditions that impose risks to their physical and psychological well-being. Health is a fundamental human right that female migrants often get deprived of due to various social, cultural, political and economic factors in the destination region. These factors catalyze inhabitable environments in which migrant women are further exposed to harm, stimulating their status as vulnerable populations. Methods: We performed a secondary analysis to explore how the social determinants of health, specifically socioeconomic status, culture, and education impact health outcomes and health care access of Ghanaian women who migrated internally within Ghana or externally to Canada. Fourteen interview transcripts, seven from each primary study dataset, were analyzed using thematic analysis and an intersectionality approach. Ethical approval was received for the primary studies and our secondary analysis via the Ethics Review Board at the University of Alberta, Canada. Results: Ghanaian female migrants experienced varying obstacles in terms of accessing health care services. The barriers were identified as cultural, financial, social, and lack of health insurance. Ghanaian women’s health outcomes were influenced by the conditions surrounding their migration including working conditions, separation from family, altered social support systems, and financial constraints. Conclusion: Areas requiring further research and development were identified by assessing migrants’ social determinants of health in the destination country and the associated-barriers in accessing health services. We hope our findings will serve as a foundation for improving health outcomes for female migrant populations and support health care professionals' practice of cultural competence.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.168

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.441
GPT teacher head0.596
Teacher spread0.155 · 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Square (Research Square)Same topicGlobal Health Workforce IssuesFrench-language works237,207