MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404489183 · doi:10.1080/21565503.2024.2423081

Using civically engaged research to promote young Black and Latino children’s well-being: lessons from a new interdisciplinary community-university, faculty–student collaboration

2024· article· en· W4404489183 on OpenAlexaff
Stephanie Potochnick, Laura Marie Armstrong, Joseph Kangmennaang, Eric Delmelle, Andrew Gadaire, Roger F. Suclupe, Ariana Shahinfar, Banu Valladares, Jennifer Stamp, Devonya Govan-Hunt, Sarai Ordonez, Lennin Caro, Keri E. Revens, Emily Mikkelsen, Ian Mikkelsen, Dede Kangnissoukpe, Moisés Alberto Calle Aguirre, Catherine Luba, Gisselle Rios Palomares, Sofia Herrera Acosta, Alejandra Rodríguez‐Fernández, Ryan P. Kilmer

Bibliographic record

VenuePolitics Groups and Identities · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicYouth Development and Social Support
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPedagogyCommunity collegeSociologyPublic relationsPsychologyPolitical scienceMedia studiesMedical educationMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents how a new interdisciplinary, faculty–student research team collaborates with multiple community partners to develop civically engaged research (CER) addressing young children’s inequitable economic mobility. We aim to create more equitable, culturally responsive prenatal to age five (PN-5) systems of care that promote economic mobility for families in Charlotte, North Carolina and beyond. As a secondary objective, we leverage our CER partnerships and research lab model to create civically engaged learning (CEL) opportunities for diverse students, amplifying community impact. We detail our origins, shaped by a university initiative and two community calls to action, and explain how overcoming CER challenges – developing new projects, managing competing output pressures, and addressing external funding demands – has solidified our PN-5 identity and CER partnership. We share key lessons learned, including the value of strong mentorship in guiding CER development, internal deliberation to navigate interdisciplinary and cross-rank academic pressures, and co-producing materials to maximize impact. We also share strategies for creating outputs that ensure mutual benefit for all – community partners, faculty, and students, and highlight the benefits of integrating CEL opportunities within CER partnerships. Overall, we hope our experiences inspire others to foster meaningful CER partnerships that enhance community well-being.

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)0.035
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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 score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.187

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0350.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0260.018
Scholarly communication0.0140.008
Open science0.0030.032
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.105
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.320 · 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 venuePolitics Groups and IdentitiesSame topicYouth Development and Social SupportFrench-language works237,207