MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6959753390 · doi:10.11575/prism/49018

Use of Social Media and Community Outreach for Immigrant Youth Recruitment during COVID-19

2021· other· en· W6959753390 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2021
Typeother
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant pathogens and resistance mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOutreachImmigrationSocial mediaRefugeeFocus groupPromotion (chess)Health promotionTarget audience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: When starting any program, it is essential to have an efficient approach of recruitment among your target population. We outline below the approach employed for recruiting immigrant and refugee teens between the ages of 14 and 18 for the Refugee and Immigrant SelfEmpowerment (RISE) for Health and Wellness summer program. Methods: We planned for a multi-pronged approach as we anticipated that this approach would be able to touch the largest number of youths, thus increasing our likelihood of having participants. As such, we aimed at placing our recruitment materials in schools, community activities, and social media. We expected that these would be the highest viewed areas during Covid-19. In schools, posters were placed within hallways and were shared by RISE youth volunteers. Social media was employed through the use of weekly Instagram posts regarding health matters and through triweekly stories endorsing the program. Finally, RISE posters had been sent to community and cultural groups throughout Calgary for their distribution. Results: More than 20 students applied to participate at the beginning of the year whereas only 9 completed the program indicating that some methods were more effective than others. The specific factors are yet to be known and will be found through future focus groups. Conclusion: Feedback from youth regarding the approach is still needed to understand the most effective approaches used. However, it should be noted that a number of other approaches, such as promotion through a central website and parental engagement, should be taken in the future.

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)0.010
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.003

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 head0.259
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.059 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MINDSame topicPlant pathogens and resistance mechanismsFrench-language works237,207