Health profiles, lifestyles and use of health resources by the immigrant population resident in Spain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Our study aimed at describing the health profiles, life styles and use of health resources by the immigrant population resident in Spain. METHODS: Cross-sectional, epidemiological study from the Spanish National Health Survey (NHS) in 2003. We analysed 1506 subjects of both sexes, aged > or =16 years, resident in Spain. RESULTS: The immigrant population present diseases that are similar to those of the autochthonous population. The autochthonous population had significantly higher values for alcohol consumption and smoking (60.8 and 39.6%) than immigrants (39.6 and 27.5%). The percentage of immigrants hospitalized in the preceding 12 months was observed to be higher than that of the Spanish population (11.4 vs. 8.2%, P < 0.05). The immigrant population consumed fewer medical drugs than the Spanish population (42.6 and 49.9%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Immigrants in Spain display better lifestyle-related parameters, in that they consume less alcohol and smoke less than the autochthonous population. As for the use of health-care resources, while immigrants register higher percentages of hospitalization compared with the Spanish population, there is no evidence of excessive and inappropriate use of other health-care resources.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".