MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4295023819 · doi:10.1177/23333936221121335

Impact of COVID-19 on Women Who Are Refugees and Mothering: A Critical Ethnographic Study

2022· article· en· W4295023819 on OpenAlexaffabout
Shela Akbar Ali Hirani, Joan Wagner

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Qualitative Nursing Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMigration, Health and Trauma
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRefugeeMental healthSocial isolationStressorEthnographyHealth careIsolation (microbiology)PsychologyNursingCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PopulationMedicineGerontologyPsychiatryPolitical scienceSociologyEnvironmental healthDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Refugee women often experience trauma and social disconnection in a new country and are at risk of experiencing reduced physical, mental, and emotional well-being. Globally, COVID-19 has affected the health and well-being of the population at large. This critical ethnographic study aimed to explore the effects of COVID-19 on women who are refugees and mothering in Saskatchewan, Canada. In-depth interviews were undertaken with 27 women who are refugees and mothering young children aged 2 years and under. This study suggests that during COVID-19, refugee women are at high risk of experiencing add-on stressors due to isolation, difficulty in accessing health care, COVID-19-related restrictions in hospitals, limited follow-up care, limited social support, financial difficulties, and compromised nutrition. During COVID-19, collaborative efforts by nurses, other health-care professionals, and governmental and non-governmental organizations are essential to provide need-based mental health support, skills-building programs, nutritional counseling, and follow-up care to this vulnerable group.

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)0.004
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 score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.091

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.007
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.238
GPT teacher head0.636
Teacher spread0.398 · 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

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Qualitative Nursing ResearchSame topicMigration, Health and TraumaFrench-language works237,207