MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7064054613

Addressing Disparities: A Study of Service and Resource Gaps for BIPOC Community Members in Hamilton and the Surrounding Area

2024· article· en· W7064054613 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueSOURCE Sheridan's Institutional Repository (Sheridan College) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionResource (disambiguation)Mental healthService (business)Action (physics)Identity (music)Focus groupService providerRace (biology)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research investigates the challenges faced by the Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) community in Hamilton, Ontario, with a focus on hate crimes, social support, and access to community resources. Utilizing a mixed-methods approach, data was collected through surveys administered to twenty-five BIPOC individuals, parents/guardians of BIPOC children, and social service providers. Findings reveal a significant surge in reported hate crimes targeting specific communities, highlighting the urgent need for comprehensive action to address discrimination and promote inclusivity. Moreover, the study identifies gaps in awareness and utilization of community resources among BIPOC individuals, underscoring the importance of culturally sensitive programs and services. Internalized forms of discrimination, such as colorism and lateral violence, were also prevalent, emphasizing the need for targeted interventions to foster a sense of belonging. Mental health emerged as a top priority, signaling the necessity for culturally competent mental health services. The research underscores the importance of addressing systemic inequalities and promoting dialogue surrounding race and identity to create a more inclusive and supportive environment for the BIPOC community in Hamilton.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.334
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSOURCE Sheridan's Institutional Repository (Sheridan College)Same topicMagnetic confinement fusion researchFrench-language works237,207