Community Outreach with Families of Young Children: Practices and Impacts in Quebec, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Community outreach workers support people accessing health and social services. Even though they have been working in the province of Quebec (Canada) for the past 40 years, their practice is poorly documented (especially with families having children aged 0 to 5 years). To document this practice and its impacts for children and families, a content analysis was performed on 55 scientific and gray literature documents, 24 interviews, and 3 focus groups. Three themes were highlighted (i.e. characteristics of the population served, actions performed by community outreach workers, perceived impacts on families and children). Community outreach workers were essential for reaching out families with vulnerable circumstances and children with special needs. They were reported to tailor interventions to respond in different but complementary ways to the healthcare system. Their practice increased access for children and families to services, increased parental abilities, increased social capital of families, and confidence toward the healthcare system. Community outreach workers helped to reduce health inequalities. It is crucial that community outreach proximity approaches be sustained. Future studies should establish which actions are the most efficient and how community outreach workers can connect families with the services they need at the right places in the right moment.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".