MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6963617183 · doi:10.20381/ruor-29891

L’EXPÉRIENCE DES MÈRES MONOPARENTALES NOIRES ET IMMIGRANTES DANS LE PROCESSUS D’INTÉGRATION SOCIALE ET PROFESSIONNELLE AU QUÉBEC

2023· other· fr· W6963617183 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueuO Research (University of Ottawa) · 2023
Typeother
Languagefr
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial impactQuarter (Canadian coin)Research methodologyGender relations

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cette étude explore l'évolution historique de la monoparentalité et les préjugés qui l'ont entourée, mettant en évidence la croissance significative des familles monoparentales au Canada, en particulier dirigées par des femmes. Les enjeux principaux incluent des défis professionnels et économiques, des implications sur la vie sociale des mères monoparentales, ainsi que des préoccupations liées au bien-être des enfants. Une attention particulière est accordée à la monoparentalité chez les femmes immigrantes, en soulignant les difficultés spécifiques à leur intégration sociale et professionnelle au Québec. L'étude révèle des obstacles systémiques, tels que le racisme, la discrimination sur le marché du travail, le manque de ressources, les stéréotypes sociaux et le jugement, contribuant à des niveaux élevés de pauvreté et d'instabilité financière. Malgré ces défis, les participantes démontrent une résilience remarquable en utilisant des stratégies créatives, telles que la poursuite de l'éducation, la recherche d'un équilibre travail-vie personnelle et la cultivation d'une estime de soi solide. Mots clés : monoparentalité, immigration, pauvreté, femmes noires, emploie, épanouissement social.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.100
Threshold uncertainty score0.201

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0200.006
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueuO Research (University of Ottawa)French-language works237,207