MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6941034964 · doi:10.11575/prism/41524

SSHRC Evidence Brief: Gender-Based Violence Against Immigrants and Refugees Living with HIV/HIV-Risk in Canada: A Systematic Review

2023· other· en· W6941034964 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2023
Typeother
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRefugeeImmigrationRacismContext (archaeology)PandemicIntersectionalityStructural violence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Immigrant and refugee women in Canada bear a disproportionate burden of HIV and HIV risk, and simultaneously experience a greater risk of gender-based violence (GBV), including interpersonal, community, and structural violence. The observed increase in multiple forms of GBV during the recent COVID-19 pandemic underscores the urgent need for research-informed progressive policies, practices, and community services to support this population. Understanding the impact of systemic racism and sexism within the context of immigrant and refugee women’s dual experiences of HIV/HIV-risk and GBV (HIV/GBV) is necessary to effectively develop comprehensive strategies that can challenge structural barriers and promote equity, social inclusion, and psycho-social well-being. This project sought to understand: • How systemic racism and sexism impact immigrant and refugee women’s dual experiences of HIV/GBV. • What policies, programs, or services, or lack there-of, support or create barriers for immigrant and refugee women experiencing HIV/GBV and what changes are required.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.059
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.557
Threshold uncertainty score0.880

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.059
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.005
Bibliometrics0.0210.023
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MIND→Same topicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions→French-language works237,207→