MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

1484 Meeting the health needs of unaccompanied asylum seeking children: a scoping review of routine health assessment

2021· review· en· W3202032010 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Behrouz Nezafat Maldonado, Sarah Al-Rawi, Bhanu Williams

Bibliographic record

VenueAbstracts · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMigration, Health and Trauma
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCINAHLFamily medicineMEDLINEGlobal healthObservational studyPediatricsEnvironmental healthPublic healthPsychiatryNursingPsychological interventionPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<h3>Background</h3> Approximately, 34 million of 79.5 million forcibly displaced persons globally are minors, many of whom are unaccompanied asylum seeking children (UASC). UASC often experience unmet health needs, physical harm or emotional trauma in their birth country, or during their journey to seek asylum. International guidelines recommend health screening for all migrant children. <h3>Objectives</h3> Scope the literature on UASC routine health assessment across Australia, European Economic Area, Canada, New Zealand, Switzerland, United Kingdom and United States (n=36). Analyse health screening programmes to inform future health policy. <h3>Methods</h3> Literature published (2010-March 2021) was systematically searched across MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cochrane and CINAHL. Records were screened against the inclusion criteria. A framework analysis across national and international organizations’ websites identified additional documents. <h3>Results</h3> 33 of 1432 records were included. UASC screening was reported across 13/36 countries, summarised in table 1. Commonly, studies were observational reports lacking references to clinical guidelines. Tuberculosis disease screening was offered in 12/13 countries. 8/13 countries used a risk-based approach, meaning UASC exposed to risk factors or from areas endemic for conditions (such as tuberculosis, hepatitis or parasites) were screened. Non-communicable disease screening guidance was present across 10/13 countries. 7/13 proposed blood testing for anaemia and nutritional deficiencies. Dental checks and developmental assessments were suggested in 7/13. Mental health screening was recommended in 6/13 countries. <h3>Conclusions</h3> Studies reporting UASC health assessment were not found for all countries. We found considerable procedural variation, which can exacerbate health inequalities. While we do not assume UASC health needs in these countries are not addressed, it raises concerns of the standards followed. Countries reporting screening may represent settings where optimal assessment is being followed. However, no audit data are available to compare guideline implementation and effectiveness. Frequently, emphasis was placed on infectious disease screening whilst other health components like mental health were less commonly addressed. UASC health should be prioritised, guidelines must include mental and social wellbeing parallel to communicable disease assessment. The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child recognises children’s right to the highest attainable standard of health. Voluntary comprehensive health assessments could ensure no child is deprived of their rights.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.602
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.450
Teacher spread0.379 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAbstractsSame topicMigration, Health and TraumaFrench-language works237,207