Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the health status of Asian immigrants, and mammogram and Pap smear use among Asian immigrant women, using data from the 2003 Canadian Community Health Survey cycle 2.1. It shows that Asian immigrants were in better health than non-immigrants, with respect to chronic conditions, but were disadvantaged in terms of their self-perceived health. Non-Asian immigrants had patterns similar to non-immigrants in terms of chronic conditions, but were also disadvantaged with respect to self-perceived health. Socioeconomic status and lifestyle factors did not explain the differences between non-immigrants and Asian and non-Asian immigrants. Asian immigrant women had low rates of mammogram and Pap smear use compared with nonimmigrant women. Non-Asian immigrant women had significantly lower rates of Pap smear use than non-immigrant women, but had patterns similar to non-immigrant women in mammography use. While language is an important barrier to mammogram use for many Asian immigrant women, a perceived lack of necessity and lack of time are major barriers to Pap smear use. The study suggests that additional research is needed to explore the health effect of factors such as culture and the immigration experience in general, which were not considered in this study. Targeted efforts should be made to promote screenings in Asian immigrant women.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".