Reproductive health behaviour of Muslim immigrant women in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose – Reproductive health is critically important for women and yet minority women in Canada are less likely to use preventive health care services. The purpose of this paper is to increase understanding of the health behaviours of this minority population and, in particular, identify barriers to accessing reproductive health care services. Design/methodology/approach – This study qualitatively analysed data from focus group discussions with 22 Muslim immigrant women in Ottawa, Canada. Findings – The theme of modesty emerged as one of the main barriers in the health seeking behaviour of Muslim immigrant women when it comes to reproductive health and, therefore, the gender of the physician was very important. Focus group participants also discussed a preference for family physicians from the same ethnic and cultural background. Adaptation, or the need to be flexible if there was no alternative to a male doctor, emerged as a theme throughout the focus groups. Emergencies were frequently cited as a reason to adapt. Practical implications – The findings reveal that while religious rules do play a predominant role in the health behaviour of Muslim immigrant women, communication by health care providers, government and health agencies can offer strategies to increase the uptake of preventive reproductive care. Originality/value – This study offers unique insights into the very personal experience of reproductive health care through rich, qualitative data. Given the impact of culture and religion on perceptions and practices, in particular related to reproductive health, this study contributes to more effective communication strategies with Muslim 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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".