Health promotion for immigrant mothers of children with developmental disabilities: Towards a transformative approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: High societal expectations that involve idealized and labour-intensive mothering are a source of stress, anxiety, guilt and frustration for women. Immigrant mothers caring for children with developmental disabilities are disproportionately burdened with health inequities. Study goals: The overall goal of our study was to examine health promotion practices of immigrant mothers with children with developmental disabilities using the Health Promotion Activities Scale (HPAS). Methods: Twenty-eight mothers of children with developmental disabilities were interviewed using the HPAS. A grounded theory approach was utilized to analyze the qualitative data. Results: Immigrant mothers of children with developmental disabilities’ engagement in health promoting activities is influenced by their role as primary caregivers, the gendered nature of mothering, non-Western views on health promotion, mothers’ burden from inequities and structural barriers pertaining to funding, disability, and migration status. The responses on the HPAS also underscore motherhood as a social construct with embedded assumptions and social expectations related to role and responsibilities that requires them to be “good” mothers. Discussion and Conclusion: There is need to incorporate transformative health promotion approaches in research and practice that consider mothers’ multicultural contexts. The intersections of motherhood, disability, gendered role expectations and migration need to be taken into account.
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 | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".