Stress interventions for immigrant parents in the United States: a scoping review protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This review will map stress interventions designed for and implemented among immigrant parents in the United States (US) according to intervention characteristics, participant characteristics, and reported outcomes and measurement tools. INTRODUCTION: In addition to parenting stressors shared with their non-immigrant counterparts, immigrant parents also face immigration stressors. Although stress interventions can effectively manage, reduce, or prevent stress among non-immigrant populations, we know little about stress interventions designed for immigrant parents in the US. This study will be the first to explore stress interventions implemented among immigrant parents in the US. INCLUSION CRITERIA: This scoping review will include published, peer-reviewed quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods studies that evaluate stress interventions designed specifically for US immigrant parents with at least 1 child under the age of 18 years. Reported interventions must include stress as a primary or secondary outcome or be labeled as a stress intervention. Stress interventions are broadly defined, with no restrictions on the type of stress targeted (eg, job, general, parenting) or the intervention's nature (ie, prevention vs. management/reduction vs. treatment). METHODS: A literature search will be conducted in ProQuest's APA PsycINFO and PsycARTICLES, CINAHL Plus (EBSCOhost), ERIC (ProQuest), Embase, MEDLINE (Ovid), International Bibliography of Social Sciences (ProQuest), and the Cochrane Library. Only English-language publications will be eligible, with no date restrictions. Retrieved titles and abstracts will be screened by at least 2 independent reviewers in duplicate. Data will be extracted using a self-developed data extraction tool. Findings will be presented in tabular or diagrammatic format, accompanied by a narrative summary. REVIEW REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework osf.io/ec39j.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".