MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139228144 · doi:10.2105/ajph.2012.301185

Ethnicity and Postmigration Health Trajectory in New Immigrants to Canada

2013· article· en· W2139228144 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Il‐Ho Kim, Christine Carrasco, Carles Muntaner, Kwame McKenzie, Samuel Noh

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Public Health · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMigration, Health and Trauma
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
KeywordsImmigrationEthnic groupMedicineDemographyCohort studyCohortSettlement (finance)GerontologyProspective cohort studyGeographyPolitical scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: In this prospective cohort study, we examined the trajectory of general health during the first 4 years after new immigrants' arrival in Canada. We focused on the change in self-rated health trajectories and their gender and ethnic disparities. METHODS: Data were derived from the Longitudinal Survey of Immigrants to Canada and were collected between April 2001 and November 2005 by Statistics Canada. We used weighted samples of 3309 men and 3351 women aged between 20 and 59 years. RESULTS: At arrival, only 3.5% of new immigrants rated their general health as poor. Significant and steady increases in poor health were revealed during the following 4 years, especially among ethnic minorities and women. Specifically, we found a higher risk of poor health among West Asian and Chinese men and among South Asian and Chinese women than among their European counterparts. CONCLUSIONS: Newly arrived immigrants are extremely healthy, but the health advantage dissipates rapidly during the initial years of settlement in Canada. Women and minority ethnic groups may be more vulnerable to social changes and postmigration settlement.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.901
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.304 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations90
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Public HealthSame topicMigration, Health and TraumaFrench-language works237,207