MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4366825176 · doi:10.59448/jah.v3i2.33

Evaluating a Culturally Tailored Public Health Forum in Improving the Knowledge and Understanding of Chronic Disease Management in the Chinese Population: A Mixed-methods Study

2023· article· en· W4366825176 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Jayneel Limbachia, Hollis Owens, Maryam Matean, Imelda W. Suen, Sophia A. Khan, Helen Novak Lauscher, Barbara Pui King Ho, Kendall Ho

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Asian Health · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Policy Implementation Science
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersMinistry of Health, British Columbia
KeywordsThematic analysisFocus groupMedicineEthnic groupHealth promotionMedical educationMulticulturalismPublic healthPopulationCommunity healthHealth equityCultural diversityFamily medicinePsychologyQualitative researchNursingPedagogySociologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Chronic disease management is fraught with many challenges for ethnic minorities. Studies conducted in non-multicultural populations suggest that patient and community engaging initiatives can improve chronic disease management practices. However, literature on culturally specific community engaging programs is relatively sparse. The interCultural Online Health Network (iCON) is a culturally tailored, patient and community engaging health promotion program, which provides culturally specific health education to BC’s multicultural communities. We aimed to assess if the iCON 2020 Chinese Health Forum can improve the knowledge and understanding of chronic disease self-management in the Chinese community of Vancouver, BC. Methods: We conducted a sequential mixed-methods study by administering pre- and post- validated questionnaires, followed by semi-structured interviews conducted one-two months after the forum. We assessed our primary outcome of difference in self-efficacy scores post-forum using paired t-tests and further illuminated our research question through a thematic analysis of the semi-structured interviews. Results: From the 381 participants that attended the Health Forum, 131 consented to completing the pre- and/or post- surveys, and seven provided consent to participate in the follow-up interview. There was a statistically significant difference in self-efficacy scores pre- and post- forum participation (Mean difference = 0.58, S.D. = 1.42; [95% CI: 0.26 – 0.90], t(77) = 3.60; P = 0.001, d = 0.41). Participants attributed the effectiveness of the Health Forum to its accessible yet engaging programming and focus on culturally tailored health education. Conclusion: A culturally tailored, patient engagement and community outreach program effectively improved Chinese community members self-efficacy in managing their chronic diseases and was well received by participants. iCON’s 2020 Chinese Health Forum presents a model with associated principles of approach for similar culturally specific health education and community engagement programs that need to be developed to reduce the burden of chronic diseases in multicultural populations.

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)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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 score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.159

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.557
GPT teacher head0.688
Teacher spread0.131 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Asian Health→Same topicHealth Policy Implementation Science→French-language works237,207→