Barriers & facilitators in accessing child health services and social supports: perceptions of international graduate student parents in Newfoundland & Labrador
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is widely acknowledged that access to health services and social supports is one of the determinants of a newcomer population's health status. It has been observed that research studies typically focus on investigating the experiences of immigrants and refugees. Experiences of other sub-groups of newcomers, such as academic sojourners, have remained overlooked and warrant attention from researchers. Using an interpretive phenomenological approach, the aim of my research was to investigate the experiences of international graduate student parents in accessing child health services and social supports. I examined perceived barriers and facilitators when accessing these services in St. John’s, Newfoundland and Labrador (NL). Through eight semi-structured interviews with these international graduate students, I found that key barriers in accessing services and support were the length of wait time, and participants’ negative experiences in navigating the healthcare system. Additionally, language barriers, participants’ limited interactions with the local population, lack of affordable daycare, and difficulties when it came to obtaining accurate healthcare information, added layers of complexity to their experience when accessing healthcare services. Factors that can facilitate access include professionalism of healthcare workers, child-friendly arrangements in patient waiting areas, and cultural sensitivity in healthcare delivery. These findings enhance our understanding of academic sojourners' access to child health services and social supports. They can also inform health promotion programs and activities targeted toward improving access to child health services and social supports for families of international students in Newfoundland and Labrador.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".