Parenting in Adversity and Individual Perceptions of (In)Access to Health and Social Support Services: A Sensemaker® Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Having access to services for health and social support has been shown to greatly affect the health and well-being of individuals, communities, and society globally. However, great disparities in accessing services exist across sub-populations. Evidence indicates that individuals living in adversity in Canada have inequitable access to health and social services. This research focused on Canadian parents experiencing varying levels of adversity in Kingston, Ontario. The three main objectives were: 1) To explore the relationship between a parent’s self-reported adversity and their perceptions and experiences of accessing health and social services in Kingston, Ontario; 2) To describe the ways adversity might create barriers and facilitate opportunities for access to health and/or social support services; and 3) To demonstrate the use of a SenseMaker® survey in public health research in a Canadian context. This study contributes Canadian data to a larger international comparative study taking place between 2019 and 2020 in Canada, Mongolia, Thailand and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. A SenseMaker® survey starts with a micro-narrative prompt (and the subsequent capture of an audio recorded or type written story), followed by questions that generate an understanding of the micro-narrative from the participants perspective as well as sociodemographic information. A purposive sample of 106 participants in Kingston, Ontario was recruited through a community-based organization and in open public spaces. The data were analyzed using a modified QUAGOL coding protocol (Dierckx de Casterlé et al., 2012). A conceptual model was produced that was informed by previous theory and the collected qualitative data. Modifications to previous understandings of access were highlighted. This research contributes to our understanding of health care and social service experiences and accessibility among parents across diverse contexts of adversity. Ultimately, this could help inform the work of health and social service providers.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".