Représentation sociale de la santé d’immigrants allophones de Montréal, Canada / Social representation of health by allophones immigrants of Montreal, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RÉSUMÉ: La province de Québec accueille 50 000 immigrants par an dont 35% sont allophones. Les immigrants ont une meilleure santé que les natifs à leur arrivée. Cet état de santé diminue avec le temps. Des liens ont été établis entre acculturation et prise de poids. L’analyse des représentations sociales de la santé révèle les obstacles et les opportunités de ces personnes à adopter de « saines habitudes de vie ». Une étude qualitative exploratoire a été menée à Montréal. L’analyse révèle des conceptions spécifiques de la santé, une évaluation positive de leur état de santé et les causes reliées à cet état. Un grand nombre de croyances, de normes et d'opinions sont exprimées en lien avec l’alimentation et l’activité physique. La représentation de la santé en contexte migratoire présente un conflit entre les valeurs du pays d’origine et du pays hôte. Des mécanismes d’enchantement et de désenchantement sont opérés pour combler l’écart entre idéal espéré et réalité vécue. Mots-clefs: saine habitude de vie ; immigrants ; représentation sociale ; acculturation. ABSTRACT : The province of Quebec allowed 50,000 immigrants per year of which 35% are allophones. Immigrants have better health than natives and the health status decrease with the time. Links are done between acculturation and increase of bodyweight. The analysis of social representation (SR) of health shows obstacles and opportunities to adopt a “ healthy lifestyles ”. A qualitative exploratory study was done in Montreal. The analysis reveals specific conceptions of health, a positive health status assessment and origins of this status. Lots of beliefs, norms and opinions are connected with food and physical activity. The social representation of health in migration context shows a struggle between country of birth values and host country values. The Mechanisms of “enchanting” and “disenchanting” are working to fill the gap between the hoped ideal and the lived reality. Keywords: healthy lifestyle; immigrants; social representation; acculturation.
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 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".