MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404186064 · doi:10.1080/15575330.2024.2423963

Community engagement in rural and urban marginalized communities in Jamaica: Building community resilience in crisis

2024· article· en· W4404186064 on OpenAlexaff
Olivene Burke, Shinique Walters, Kaedi Burke, Vanessa Ellis Colley, Roger Bent

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunity Development · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban and Rural Development Challenges
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommunity resilienceResilience (materials science)Economic growthCommunity engagementPsychological resilienceCommunity organizingUrban resilienceSociologySocioeconomicsDevelopment economicsPolitical scienceGeographyUrban planningEconomicsPsychologySocial psychologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the Caribbean, Jamaica mobilized strategies to ensure that the most vulnerable were protected against the threats and fears of COVID-19 and other crises over time. One strategy involved wide-scale collaboration with public and private sectors, non-governmental and community-based organizations, and volunteers. This study describes the approach taken by stakeholders in response to the needs of vulnerable residents in marginalized communities, and to highlight the experiences building community resilience during COVID-19. Three questions guided the research: 1) What major issues that affected the community during the COVID-19 crisis? 2) What measures have been implemented to help communities manage and adapt coping mechanism during this crisis? and 3) How has the community shown resilience and recovery in mitigating crises? A descriptive research design was employed comprising focus groups and interviews. We sampled 28 participants from 7 non-governmental organizations and 12 communities in rural and urban Jamaica. The analysis generated policy recommendations.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.133

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunity DevelopmentSame topicUrban and Rural Development ChallengesFrench-language works237,207