MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205260511 · doi:10.4081/jphr.2021.2274

Social Determinants of the Disproportionately Higher Rates of Covid-19 Infection among African Caribbean and Black (Acb) Population: A Systematic Review Protocol

2021· review· en· W4205260511 on OpenAlexaffabout
Josephine Etowa, Jemal Demeke, Getachew Abrha, Fiqir Worku, Wale Ajiboye, Sheryl Beauchamp, Itunu Taiwo, Pascal Djiadeu, Ghose Bishwajit

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of public health research · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFood Security and Health in Diverse Populations
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Work & HealthMcMaster UniversityUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCINAHLPandemicMedicineContext (archaeology)Health carePopulationSystematic reviewHealth equityEnvironmental healthMEDLINEPublic healthGerontologyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)DiseaseGeographyEconomic growthPolitical scienceInfectious disease (medical specialty)NursingPsychological interventionPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The challenges of identifying and eliminating racial disparities regarding the exposure, transmission, prevention, and treatment of communicable diseases within the healthcare system have been a mounting concern since the COVID-19 pandemic began. The African, Caribbean, and Black (ACB) populations in Canada represent a fast-expanding and underprivileged community, which have been previously found to have higher susceptibility to communicable diseases and lower sensitivity to intervention measures. Currently, there is insufficient evidence to adequately identify racial patterns in the prevalence and healthcare utilization among the ACB population within the context of the ongoing pandemic. Our proposed study will explore the association between the social determinants of health (SDH) and COVID-19 health outcomes in ACB populations in high-income countries (UK, US, Australia). We will explore the literary evidence through a systematic review (SR) of COVID-19 literature covering the period between December 2019 and October 2020. The objectives include investigating the effect of SDH on the ACB populations' risk to COVID-19 health outcomes, including COVID-19 infection incidence, severity of disease, hospitalization, mortality and barriers to the treatment and management of COVID-19 for Black people in Canada. In addition, this project aims to investigate the effect of COVID-19 on ACB communities in Ontario by examining the challenges that front-line healthcare workers and administrators have during this pandemic as it pertains to service provisions to ACB communities. A systematic review of original and review studies will be conducted based on the publications on eleven databases (MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, NHS EDD, Global Health, PsychInfo, PubMed, Scopus, Proquest, and Taylor and Francis Online Journals) published between December 2019 to October 2020. Primary outcomes will include the rate of COVID-19 infection. The systematic review will include a meta-analysis of available quantitative data, as well as a narrative synthesis of qualitative studies. This systematic review will be among the first to report racial disparities in COVID-19 infection among the ACB population in Canada. Through synthesizing population data regarding the risk factors on various levels, the findings from this systematic review will provide recommendations for future research and evidence for clinical practitioners and social workers. Overall, a better understanding of the nature and consequences of racial disparities during the pandemic will provide policy directions for effective interventions and resilience-building in the post-pandemic era.

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)0.053
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.070
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.279

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0530.070
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0140.015
Bibliometrics0.0210.016
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0070.008
Open science0.0050.004
Research integrity0.0050.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0580.005

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 head0.759
GPT teacher head0.680
Teacher spread0.080 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations18
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of public health researchSame topicFood Security and Health in Diverse PopulationsFrench-language works237,207