MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3216034327 · doi:10.3389/fmed.2021.728878

Medical Facilities for Refugees in Europe: Creating a Consultation for Resettled Syrian Families

2021· article· en· W3216034327 on OpenAlexaff
Nahema El Ghaziri, J. Blaser, Mary Malebranche, Brigitte Pahud-Vermeulen, Teresa Gyuriga, Joan-Carles Surı́s, Mario Gehri, Patrick Bodenmann

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Medicine · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMigration, Health and Trauma
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRefugeeMultidisciplinary approachContext (archaeology)NursingHealth careIntervention (counseling)MedicineSyrian refugeesFamily medicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The wave of migration that has hit Europe in recent years has led to several changes in the organization of asylum systems and medical care provided to migrants. Previous studies indicate that asylum seekers and refugees face multiple barriers in accessing health care. For that reason, adapted structures are needed. In this context, a family consultation service was implemented in our medical center in Lausanne, Switzerland. It aimed at addressing the unique health care needs of recently resettled families from Syria, which has been the leading source country for refugees since 2014. This intervention, developed through collaboration between the University Center for Primary Care and Public Health (Unisanté) and the Children's Hospital of Lausanne (HEL) involved a multidisciplinary team comprising a pediatrician, a general practitioner and a pediatric nurse. Bringing together a multidisciplinary team optimized care coordination, facilitated communication between care providers and enabled a more global vision of the family system with the aim of enhancing quality of care.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0110.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.012
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.334 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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 venueFrontiers in MedicineSame topicMigration, Health and TraumaFrench-language works237,207