MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7097924082

The vast majority of Ethiopian

2015· article· en· W7097924082 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMigration, Health and Trauma
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRefugeeSpanish Civil WarTorturePoliticsImmigrationDepression (economics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

refugees are rural, poor, and illiterate, reflecting the reality of their country. However, most Ethiopians who have reached the U.S. and Canada are well-educated by Ethiopian standards having, at a minimum, an 8th grade education. They come from a small segment of Ethiopian society, the urban or semi-urban elite. Typically they left for political reasons, fearing arrest, imprisonment, torture and death. Some were caught up in the civil war either as combatants or suspected combatants (McSpadden 1989) The number of Ethiopian refugees in the U.S. and Canada is quite small. In the U.S., for example, in 1979 only 169 were admitted as refugees. The ceiling for African refugees in the FY 1987 was 3,500 and later was reduced to 2,000, most of whom were Ethiopians (World Refugee Survey 1988:4). By the end of 1989 approximately 17,500 Ethiopians had been admitted to the U.S. a s refugees. The number admitted to Canada is substantially smaller. The vast majority of these refugees are single young men, here without families and often without previous friends from Ethiopia. This paper is based on a larger analytical study of the psychological well-being of Ethiopian refugees. It began because of reported high levels of depression and suicide among Ethiopian refugees, especially young, single men. Over 100 refugees were interviewed in

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.976
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.006

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMigration, Health and Trauma→French-language works237,207→