The CAPP 2 Study Protocol: Strengthening the capacity of healthcare providers to reduce the impact of COVID-19 on African, Caribbean, and Black communities in Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction The COVID-19 pandemic emerged as an unprecedented challenge for healthcare systems across the world disproportionately impacting immigrant and racialized populations. Canadian African, Caribbean, and Black (ACB) communities representing some of the most vulnerable populations in terms of their susceptibility to health risks, receipt of adequate care, and chances of recovery. The COVID-19 ACB Providers Project (CAPP 2) aims to strengthen the ability of health care providers (HCP) to address this community’s COVID-19 related healthcare needs. Informed by CAPP 1.0 Project, a mixed-method study which examined COVID-19 pandemic impact on ACB communities in Ontario (Ottawa and Toronto), this second study seeks to develop and implement educational programs on five key areas (modules) to strengthen the capacity of HCPs working with ACB populations. The five modules (topics) include: 1) COVID-19 and its impacts on health, 2) social determinants of health and health inequities, 3) critical health literacy, 4) critical racial literacy, and 5) cultural competence and safety. Methods and analysis An implementation science approach will guide the development, implementation, and evaluation of the evidence-informed interventions. Intersectionality lens, socio-ecological model (SEM) and community-based participatory research (CBPR) frameworks will inform the research process. To ensure active stakeholder engagement, there will be a Project Advisory Committee comprised of 16 ACB community members, health providers, and partner agency representatives. Five modules will be developed: two virtual simulation games in collaboration with leading simulation experts, and three non-simulation modules. Ethics and dissemination Ethics approval was granted by the University of Ottawa Research Ethics Board on July 18th, 2023 (H - 01-23 - 8069). The results of this study will be disseminated in community workshops, an online learning platform, at academic conferences and in peer-reviewed publications.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.078 | 0.073 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.071 | 0.012 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".