Maternité & Migration. Entre dispositifs de droit commun et besoins spécifiques, comment penser l'accompagnement de ces femmes enceintes ?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Migrants health and perinatal health are two major issues in the field of Public Health. Link these thematics to envisage theirs specificities is a real challenge. And, these women are still more and more numerous to give birth in France.However, these women, whose lives have been scarred by violence and trauma, require special attention and care.Because they have grown up in another Culture, with the importance of the mother and the group, it is very often difficult for them to find their place in this host country, deprived of their guides and references. But, if there is a step in a woman's life that generates psychological reorganization and existential questioning, it is the onset of pregnancy and the access in the field of motherhood. This memory work is based on the implementation of a qualitative approach, including awarding of telephone interviews with migrant women participants in workshops devoted to perinatality and proposed by the service of transcultural medicine in the St André hospital (Bordeaux), the collection and the analysis of data resulting from participant observations in workshops and consultations while initiating a reflexive work through the realization of semi-directive interviews with professionals working with this specifical public. This fieldwork led to the development of recommendations aimed at promoting the perinatal health of these migrant women. In reference to the axes developed by the Ottawa Charter, these recommendations aim at undertaking adapted, concrete and urgent actions in favor of these women who are carrying life. Between the optimized use of medico-social interpreting, the greater attention paid to the community approach and the need to reinforce the weakened empowerment of these women, it is clear that there is still a long way to go.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 teacher head, 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".