Access of Maternal Health Services by Refugee Women in Canada: A Scoping Review Protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
By the end of 2022, over 35.5 million refugees were forcibly displaced due to worldwide conflicts, persecution, human rights violations, and political unrest. Over 46,500 refugees resettled in Canada, with the majority being women of age. Refugee women face a higher risk of adverse maternal health outcomes due to a series of barriers. As a response, Canada has established community health centres (CHCs) to provide maternal health services to these women under centralized and culturally appropriate services. However, significant knowledge gaps still exist regarding the role of CHCs in Canada, and the barriers and facilitators that refugee women continue to face when accessing maternal health services. Therefore, the purpose of this scoping review is to fill knowledge gaps concerning the barriers and facilitators that refugee women encounter when accessing maternal health services in Canada, and to explore the role of CHCs in this context.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.067 | 0.068 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.030 | 0.027 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.037 | 0.004 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".