MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Anti-Immigrant Rhetoric and Policy as Manifestations of Structural Racism—Implications for Advancing Health Equity

2021· letter· en· W3183403183 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Nadia Islam, Naheed Ahmed

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA Network Open · 2021
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMigration, Health and Trauma
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSchool of Medicine, New York UniversityYork UniversityMedStar Health Research Institute
KeywordsRhetoricImmigrationEquity (law)RacismSociologyReligious studiesCriminologyPolitical sciencePhilosophyTheologyGender studiesLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent work by researchers and policy makers has argued that solutions to racial inequities in health must target manifestations of structural racism, such as barriers to economic mobility, high-quality education, health care, and high-paying jobs, and the context and policies that allow racial inequities to persist. 1 Despite this long-overdue reckoning with the pervasiveness and consequences of structural racism in the United States, there are significant challenges to conducting research on discriminatory rhetoric and policies that target particular groups and are associated with health outcomes.Both the 2016 presidential election and subsequent Trump administration were characterized by anti-Muslim and anti-immigrant rhetoric as well as corresponding policy actions targeting individuals from Muslim-majority and Latin American countries, most notably Executive Order (EO) 13669, commonly referred to as the "Muslim Ban."In an innovative analysis, Samuels and

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0130.021
Scholarly communication0.0090.012
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0690.053
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.060
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.370 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAMA Network OpenSame topicMigration, Health and TraumaFrench-language works237,207