MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382938997 · doi:10.17061/phrp3322315

A rapid review of initiatives to address financial strain and wellbeing in high-income contexts

2023· review· en· W4382938997 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenuePublic Health Research & Practice · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Literacy, Pension, Retirement Analysis
Canadian institutionsProvincial Laboratory of Public HealthUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsycINFOEquity (law)MEDLINEHealth equityMedical educationMedicinePublic relationsPsychologyPolitical sciencePublic healthNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has exacerbated financial strain among populations worldwide. This is concerning, given the link between financial strain and health. There is little evidence to guide action in this area, particularly from a public health perspective. To address this gap, we examined initiatives to address financial wellbeing and financial strain in high-income contexts. METHODS: We used rapid review methodology and applied an equity-focused lens in our analysis. We searched six databases (MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, ProQuest, Informit, and Google Advanced) for peer-reviewed, academic and practice-based literature evaluating initiatives to address financial strain and wellbeing in high-income contexts published between 2015-2020. We conducted a relevancy and quality appraisal of included academic sources. We used EPPI-reviewer software to extract equity-related, descriptive data, and author-reported outcomes. RESULTS: We conducted primary screening on a total of 4779 titles/abstracts (academic n = 4385, practice-based n = 394); of these, we reviewed 182 full text articles (academic n = 87, practice-based n = 95) to assess their relevancy and fit with our research question. A total of 107 sources were excluded based on our selection criteria and relevance to the research question (Figure 1), leaving 75 sources that were extracted for this review (academic n = 39, practice-based n = 36). These sources focused on initiatives predominantly based in Australia, the US, and Canada, with a smaller number from the UK and Europe. Most sources primarily targeted financial literacy and personal/family finances, followed by employment, housing, and education. CONCLUSIONS: We found that holistic initiatives (i.e., complex, wrap-around) that ensured people's basic needs were met (for example, before building financial skills) were aligned with positive and equitable financial wellbeing and financial strain outcomes, as reported in the reviewed studies. We noted significant gaps in the literature related to equity, such as the impact of initiatives on socially excluded populations (e.g., Indigenous peoples, racialised peoples, and rural dwellers). More research using a public health lens is required to guide equitable and sustainable action in this area.

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.

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)0.042
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.099
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.876
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0420.099
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.010
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.304
GPT teacher head0.481
Teacher spread0.178 · 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