Examining barriers to harm reduction and child welfare services for pregnant women and mothers who use substances using a stigma action framework
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pregnant women and mothers who use substances often face significant barriers to accessing and engaging with substance use services. A scoping review was conducted in 2019 to understand how stigma impacts access to, retention in and outcomes of harm reduction and child welfare services for pregnant women and mothers who use substances. The forty-two (n = 42) articles were analysed using the Action Framework for Building an Inclusive Health System developed by Canada's Chief Public Health Officer to articulate the ways in which stigma and related health system barriers are experienced at the individual, interpersonal, institutional and population levels. Many articles highlighted barriers across multiple levels, 19 of which cited barriers at the individual level (i.e., fear and mistrust of child welfare services), 18 at the interpersonal level (i.e., familial and relational influence on accessing substance use treatment), 30 at the institutional level (i.e., high organisational expectations on women) and 17 at the population level (i.e., negative stereotypes and racism). Our findings highlight the interconnectedness of stigma and related barriers and the ways in which stigma at the institutional and population levels pervasively influence individual and interpersonal experiences of stigma. Despite a wealth of literature on barriers to treatment and support for pregnant women and mothers who use substances, there has been minimal focus on how systems can address these formidable barriers. This review highlights the ways in which the barriers are connected and identifies opportunities for service providers and policymakers to better support pregnant women and mothers who use substances.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 it