Psychological Distress Among Immigrants and Visible Minorities in Canada: a Contextual Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Immigrants to Canada are less likely to report depression compared with the non-immigrant population. This healthy migrant effect has not so far been explained by demographic and socioeconomic determinants of health. AIM: The present study examined whether the psychological health advantage of immigrants varied across Canadian health regions and investigated the hypothesis of immigrant density as a determinant of immigrant mental health advantage. METHODS: Data from the 2000-2001 Canadian Community Health Survey were used to build multi-level models estimating variation in depression within and between health regions by immigrant/visible minority status. RESULTS: Immigrant and visible minority residents were less likely to experience depression compared with the general population. Depression varied across health regions and the extent of variation was greater for visible minorities. The likelihood of depression decreased with increasing percentage of immigrants in the region among visible minority participants but not among whites. CONCLUSIONS: The protection against depression afforded by immigrant and visible minority status in Canada appears to depend on contextual factors, notably the percentage of immigrants in the region. Future work should seek to better characterize the experiences of visible minorities in different settings.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".