MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4417194251 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2025-107994

Sexual and reproductive health policies for migrant, immigrant and refugee populations in select high-income countries: a policy analysis protocol

2025· article· en· W4417194251 on OpenAlexaffabout
Negin Mirzaei, Patience Castleton, Zelalem Mengesha, Zachary Munn, Mumtaz Begum, Jodie Avery, Salima Meherali, Zohra S Lassi

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAdolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersMedical Research Future FundNational Health and Medical Research CouncilMedical Research Council
KeywordsProtocol (science)Reproductive healthImmigrationRefugeeHealth policyPublic healthReproductive medicineHealth services research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: International migrants comprise 3.6% of the global population and face systemic barriers to accessing sexual and reproductive health (SRH) services, such as contraception, safe abortion care and sexual function support. In high-income countries, policy frameworks vary widely, with migration status significantly influencing entitlement and access to host countries. This protocol outlines a planned study to systematically analyse SRH policies in high-income countries with strong migrant integration frameworks, aiming to identify policy gaps, assess inclusivity and inform recommendations to strengthen Australia's SRH policy landscape. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study employs a systematic policy analysis using the Joanna Briggs Institute scoping review methodology. Countries with ≥10% migrant populations and a Migrant Integration Policy Index health score ≥70 will be included. 13 countries meet these criteria, including Australia, Canada and Sweden. A comprehensive search of academic databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature and ProQuest Public Health) and grey literature from governmental and non-governmental sources will be conducted. Data extraction will follow Bacchi's 'What's the Problem Represented to Be?' APPROACH: Thematic analysis will combine deductive and inductive methods to examine the extent to which SRH policies address migrant and refugee needs, including sexual function, safe abortion care and fertility care. A comparative policy matrix will identify strengths, limitations and best practices. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: As this study analyses publicly available policy documents, ethics approval is not required. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and policy briefs targeting stakeholders involved in SRH policy and migrant health. REGISTRATION DETAILS: This protocol is registered with the Open Science Framework (OSF): https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/AYZ6P.

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)0.111
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.070
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.111
Threshold uncertainty score0.585

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1110.070
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.006
Bibliometrics0.0160.012
Science and technology studies0.0060.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.008
Open science0.0060.007
Research integrity0.0060.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0590.008

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 head0.164
GPT teacher head0.573
Teacher spread0.409 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Open→Same topicAdolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health→French-language works237,207→