MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309722651 · doi:10.1177/00221678221124654

The CoVivre Program: Community Development and Empowerment to Address the Inequalities Exacerbated by the COVID-19 Pandemic in the Greater Montreal Area, Canada

2022· article· en· W4309722651 on OpenAlexaffabout
Joy Schinazi, Tara Santavicca, Cindy Ngov, Anabelle Vanier-Clément, Aissata Touré, Emmanuelle Bolduc, Cécile Rousseau

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Humanistic Psychology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCOVID-19 and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmpowermentOutreachEconomic growthRefugeeGeneral partnershipMental healthPolitical sciencePsychological resilienceGovernment (linguistics)Public relationsSociologyCommunity engagementSocioeconomic statusPovertyPsychologySocial psychologyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The COVID-19 pandemic had devastating effects around the world, yet it was not experienced equally by all. The emergence of the virus has been linked with the intensification of discrimination and inequities, as well as other systemic issues already present in society prior to the pandemic. The CoVivre Program was created with the mission to facilitate and accelerate initiatives aimed at reducing socioeconomic and health disparities caused by the COVID-19 pandemic in the Greater Montreal Area. CoVivre aims to inform, protect, and support communities, with an emphasis on communities experiencing marginalization, such as ethnic and religious minorities, refugees, asylum seekers, and precarious workers. This mission is guided by the latest research and CoVivre’s values of community empowerment, partnership, democratic communications, and cultural competency, among others. This article describes the process of planning and implementing the program and its components: Communications, Outreach and Awareness Raising, and Psychosocial Support and Mental Health, with a description of one project per component. It also aims to identify obstacles and facilitators of the program, to reflect on their relation with local and global ecosystems and their relationship to community action, and to examine community mobilization as expressing both resilience and resistance to top-down impositions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score0.214

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0080.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.000

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 head0.162
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.272 · 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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Humanistic PsychologySame topicCOVID-19 and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207