MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4327622008 · doi:10.11124/jbies-22-00402

Postnatal experiences of South Asian immigrant women in Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America: a qualitative systematic review protocol

2023· article· en· W4327622008 on OpenAlexaffabout
Nikita Gupta-Dame, Danielle Macdonald, Amanda Ross‐White, Erna Snelgrove‐Clarke

Bibliographic record

VenueJBI Evidence Synthesis · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityCentre for Excellence in Mining Innovation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationKingdomPolitical scienceAsian americansMedicineGender studiesGenealogyGerontologyHistoryEthnic groupSociologyLawBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this review is to gain an understanding of the postnatal experiences of South Asian immigrant women in 4 English-speaking countries: Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States. INTRODUCTION: The postnatal period is an important time in the lives of women and their families. Major changes take place during this time as a woman's body gradually returns to its pre-pregnancy state. The postnatal period is also a time for women to adapt and transition into their new role as a mother. Immigrant women experience many challenges in accessing quality postnatal care in comparison to non-migrant populations. South Asian immigrant women, specifically, encounter unique postnatal experiences and face a myriad of hardships in accessing proper postnatal care. The presence of cultural factors and traditional norms largely influence postnatal experiences of South Asian immigrant women. Cultural factors include, but are not limited to, relationships with family and in-laws, gender-specific roles, newborn gender, mental health stigma, language barriers, acculturative stress, and expression of depression. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Qualitative studies in English reporting postnatal experiences of South Asian immigrant women published after January 2000 will be considered for this review. Research designs may include, but are not limited to, feminist research, exploratory descriptive design, or ethnography. Gray literature will be limited to theses and dissertations only. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, EthOS, and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses will be searched. Disagreement resolution, data extraction, and meta-aggregation will be completed through discussion between 2 reviewers. Studies will be critically appraised and assigned a level of credibility. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42022354306.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.448
Threshold uncertainty score0.550

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.337 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJBI Evidence SynthesisSame topicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and PostpartumFrench-language works237,207