MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4292794396 · doi:10.29333/ajqr/12290

Meeting Needs and Seeking Peace: Experiences of Micro-Finance Loan Recipient Women of Karachi, Pakistan

2022· article· en· W4292794396 on OpenAlexaff
Farhana Madhani, Catherine Tompkins, Susan M. Jack, Carolyn Byrne

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Qualitative Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMicrofinance and Financial Inclusion
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLoanMicro financeBusinessPolitical scienceEconomic growthFinanceEconomicsMicrofinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The association between socio-economic status and health is well established. While involvement in a micro-finance program has been shown to reduce poverty among women, little is known about how this involvement impacts their mental health. Using interpretive descriptive methodology, this qualitative study explored women’s perceptions of how their participation in micro-finance programs influenced their mental health. Data were collected and analyzed through interviews with 32 urban-dwelling women from Karachi, Pakistan who have been micro-finance loan recipients for a period of 1 to 5 years. Women recognized micro-finance programs as being a major inspiration towards enhancing their mental health. The majority of participants, regardless of the number of years they held a micro-finance loan, revealed that seeking micro-loans and establishing income-generation activities assisted them to reduce tensions related to meeting their fundamental needs. Among the few participants who were not experiencing positive mental health at the time of the interview, they could foresee hope towards a better and an improved state of mental health. The need for and the importance of vocational skills training, economic stability, opportunity for education and environmental safety were echoed by these “everyday women” of Pakistan. Multiple stakeholders and micro-finance program should work collaboratively for the promotion of mental health determinants.

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)0.002
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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.007
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.308 · 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Qualitative ResearchSame topicMicrofinance and Financial InclusionFrench-language works237,207