Advocating with Humility: Improving Access of Treatment Services for Filipino Immigrant Families with Autistic Children in Alberta, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Different factors influence access to services for Filipino immigrant families with autistic children in Alberta, Canada. These include the immigration process, the immediate needs of the family as they settle down in their new environment, unfamiliarity in getting services for their children, family dynamics, cultural identity, cultural beliefs about autism, financial constraints, and other personal factors. As a result, Filipino immigrants are less likely to access healthcare services compared to other immigrant populations in North America. The use of cultural humility by mental health professionals will address the dynamic intersectionality of these factors and influence access to services for Filipino immigrant families with autistic children. Moreover, cultural humility will help clinicians learn strategies that respect Filipino immigrant families' cultural identity. In particular, the methods of reflective practice, collaborative learning, social justice, and advocacy integration are applicable. These techniques will help therapists strengthen their relationship with Filipino immigrant families, create positive changes in their lives, and ensure healthy development for their children. Therapists may use cultural humility to enhance access, utilization, and engagement of services for Filipino immigrant families with autistic children.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".