MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7139295305

Understanding the needs and experiences of Asian Female International graduate students

2025· dissertation· W7139295305 on OpenAlexaff
Aasna Devani

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace (University of Toronto) · 2025
Typedissertation
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural Competency in Health Care
Canadian institutionsCanadian Counselling and Psychotherapy AssociationEmployment and Social Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThematic analysisQualitative researchNarrativeMental healthReflexivityWarrantProcess (computing)Perception
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The uniqueness of being female, international, and a graduate student poses its own challenges that warrant special attention and efforts from institutions and their leaders. Previous studies have addressed issues and challenges faced by international students, including financial stress, homesickness, racism, discrimination, barriers to care, and mental health issues such as depression and anxiety (Anandavalli et al., 2021; Kawamoto et al., 2017; King et al., 2023; Lee and Rice, 2007). However, research on understanding these students’ experiences must take into account the local context, as well as challenges specific to intersectional identities. This understanding can then inform programming designed to meet the needs of this group. The current study used a multiple case study design to examine Asian female international graduate students’ overall experiences, needs, challenges, and barriers to accessing relevant resources, programs, and services. Body mapping exercises and semi-structured interviews were conducted with 10 participants. Body mapping is the process of creating a life size human body image using art-based techniques such as painting and drawing to represent aspects of people’s lives and the worlds they live in. Data collected from the body mapping exercises and semi structured interviews were analyzed using reflective thematic analysis, and themes and codes were identified. Data were organized by major themes discussed, most recurrent themes followed by sub themes which were supported by direct quotes from participants. Body maps were analyzed individually, focusing on descriptive details as well as researcher understanding from interviews and narratives provided by participants. The study identified challenges and provided recommendations to enhance existing programs and services as well as preventative measures that can address the unique needs of this group.Keywords: intersectionality, higher education, resources, well-being

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.005
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.106
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.263 · 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.

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace (University of Toronto)Same topicCultural Competency in Health CareFrench-language works237,207