MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6887612442 · doi:10.17605/osf.io/2zvmu

Challenges for the integration of Syrian refugees

2018· article· en· W6887612442 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Science Framework · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMigration, Health and Trauma
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRefugeeSyrian refugeesLegislationRefugee crisisPoliticsComprehensive Plan of ActionDestinationsDisplaced person

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We conducted a study to provide an overview of the situation of Syrian refugees and other non-citizens living in host countries, as well as to summarize a series of policies and legislation towards refugees. We explored the cases of: (1) Turkey, which is one of the main destinations for Syrians fleeing the crisis in their home country; (2) Germany and United Kingdom, high-income countries where the public sentiment about refugees has changed/shifted overtime; (3) Greece and Italy, countries that share a close border with countries from where there are large refugee influxes; and (4) Canada and Australia, which do not share borders with countries from which there is a significant refugee influx and have had some success with integrating migrants and refugees. Our review of refugee policies suggests that successful resettlement of Syrian refugees was mainly due to political commitment coupled with an incredible public support and community engagement, including private sponsorship of refugees. Successful social and economic policies to deal with the refugee crisis demand a combined effort in terms of planning, implementing, monitoring, and assessing initiatives. Most importantly, record keeping and sharing data with stakeholders need to be improved, which is a joint complaint by non-profit organizations and academic institutions.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0210.012
Scholarly communication0.0120.006
Open science0.0020.018
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.121
GPT teacher head0.466
Teacher spread0.345 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Science FrameworkSame topicMigration, Health and TraumaFrench-language works237,207