MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W6921367005 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.7636208.v1

Cumulative stigma among injured immigrant workers: a qualitative exploratory study in Montreal (Quebec, Canada)

2019· article· en· W6921367005 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff

Notice bibliographique

RevueFigshare · 2019
Typearticle
Langueen
DomainePsychology
ThématiqueMigration, Health and Trauma
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésExploratory researchGrounded theoryQualitative researchFocus groupContext (archaeology)DistressStigma (botany)Mental healthInterview

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Purpose: This paper presents the phenomenon of stigmatisation among injured immigrant and ethnocultural minority workers experiencing a long-standing disability. Stigmatisation was one of the main findings of our study, the aim of which was to gain insight into the work rehabilitation process in the context of intercultural relations in Quebec. Various categories of stakeholders took part in the study, which sought to describe their experiences and perspectives and to identify the constraints, barriers, facilitators, and specific needs they encounter in terms of intercultural competencies. Methods: A purposive sample of 40 individuals was selected and divided into four groups: workers (N = 9), clinicians (N = 15), workers’ compensation board rehabilitation experts (N = 14), and workplace representatives (N = 2). Semi-structured interviews were conducted using the critical incident technique, combined with an “explicitation” interviewing technique. Data collection and analysis procedures were based on grounded theory. Results: This study shows that immigrant and ethnocultural minority workers may experience stigmatisation as a cumulative process involving different concomitant parts of their “identity”: age, gender, social class, ethnicity, mental health, and occupational injuries. Cumulative stigma may aggravate personal distress and feelings of shame, rejection, and disqualification from full social acceptance. Negative anticipatory judgements made by practitioners may undermine the therapeutic relationship and breach mutual trust and confidence. Conclusions: The phenomenon of stigmatisation is well documented in the sociological and health literature, but studies tend to focus on only one type of stigma at a time. Future research should focus on the cumulative process of stigmatisation specifically affecting immigrant and ethnocultural minority workers and its potentially damaging impact on self-concept, healthcare delivery, rehabilitation interventions, and the return to work.Implications for rehabilitationThe repetition of certain clinical situations with people from certain groups should not lead practitioners to undue generalizations, even if they may sometimes be accurate; these generalizations must always be verified on a case by case basis.Ethnicity and culture, along with other social attributions, should serve as working hypotheses or support tools in health communication, not as hindrances to clinical reasoning.Practitioners should deepen their understanding of the patient’s treatment expectations and the support available for rehabilitation in his family and community.Stigma in the context of care is linked to the idea of conforming to the proposed institutional models of care (including expected beliefs, attitudes, and behaviours). Therefore, practitioners should be aware that alleged differences, misunderstanding or disagreements can highlight an asymmetry in practitioner–patient power relationships.Organisations should also promote exchange and reflection on how to adapt their institutional models to avoid asymmetrical power relations.Intercultural training should be promoted at the various organisational levels so that managers, decision-makers, and practitioners share a common knowledge of the challenges of intervention in multi-ethnic settings. The repetition of certain clinical situations with people from certain groups should not lead practitioners to undue generalizations, even if they may sometimes be accurate; these generalizations must always be verified on a case by case basis. Ethnicity and culture, along with other social attributions, should serve as working hypotheses or support tools in health communication, not as hindrances to clinical reasoning. Practitioners should deepen their understanding of the patient’s treatment expectations and the support available for rehabilitation in his family and community. Stigma in the context of care is linked to the idea of conforming to the proposed institutional models of care (including expected beliefs, attitudes, and behaviours). Therefore, practitioners should be aware that alleged differences, misunderstanding or disagreements can highlight an asymmetry in practitioner–patient power relationships. Organisations should also promote exchange and reflection on how to adapt their institutional models to avoid asymmetrical power relations. Intercultural training should be promoted at the various organisational levels so that managers, decision-makers, and practitioners share a common knowledge of the challenges of intervention in multi-ethnic settings.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,003
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: Qualitatif
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,051
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,368

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0030,003
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0020,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0230,006
Communication savante0,0040,001
Science ouverte0,0020,003
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0030,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,059
Tête enseignante GPT0,353
Écart entre enseignants0,294 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeQualitatif
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2019
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueFigshare→Même sujetMigration, Health and Trauma→Travaux en français237 207→