Realizing the right to health of newcomer women survivors of conflict-related sexual violence within the Canadian community healthcare context
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sexual violence in conflict settings is a gender-based phenomenon which violates survivors’ right to health in terms of both immediate and long-lasting health status. Conflict-related sexual violence (CRSV) has been known to destabilize communities and break down social relations, which when compounded with the effects of armed conflict can make it difficult for survivors to remain in their community or country post-attack. The use of CRSV in conflicts such as the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and Rwanda has caused widespread displacement and migration. Female migrants (refugees, asylum seekers, or otherwise) to Western contexts such as Canada deal with intersecting traumas and multiple stressors. Migrants have the propensity to underutilize more formal or traditionally Western health and social services and encounter multiple barriers in resettlement countries, which can cause their health status to further deteriorate. Community-based health care that takes a holistic, culturally humble approach to realizing the right to health through active community consultation and involvement as well as integration into the system of community health centers may be worth looking at as an option for more fully realizing this important social human right. There is currently a lack of such services and programming in the community health centers of resettlement cities such as Winnipeg for female migrant survivors of CRSV that would meet these criteria. Taking a gendered, culturally humble, and survivor-centered approach to realizing the right to health of migrant women survivors of CRSV, this work aims to highlight an issue that is under-discussed and under-researched, with the goal of amplifying the voices of women exercising agency over their health care.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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".