MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2475503080 · doi:10.4236/jbbs.2016.68029

Chronic Stress and Its Symptoms among Mexican Immigrants in Edmonton, Canada

2016· article· en· W2475503080 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Blanca Elizabeth Pozos Radillo, María de Lourdes Preciado Serrano, Ana Rosa Plascencia Campos, Luis Zaragoza-Perales

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Behavioral and Brain Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth, psychology, and well-being
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationAffect (linguistics)MedicineChronic stressInsomniaStress (linguistics)Clinical psychologyChronic fatigueMultivariate analysisAnxietyGerontologyPsychologyPsychiatryChronic fatigue syndromeInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Immigration-related stress is the result of an environment that imposes demands surpassing the psychological resources of those suffering from it with a destabilizing effect on their physical and psychological health. The purpose of this study is to determine what the chronic stress levels are and their association with psychophysiological symptoms and gender in Mexican immigrants living in Edmonton, Canada. A representative random sample was made of 237 immigrants in 2012. The stress symptoms inventory was used and a multiple regression and multivariate analysis was made. Results indicated that chronic stress levels were: 14% high, 46% medium and 40% low and psychophysiological predictor symptoms were: fatigue, constipation, frequent colds, cold hands and feet and insomnia, and the female gender. Therefore one may conclude that a precise identification of the predictor symptoms of chronic stress may help promote and implement programs aimed at timely prevention of stress before they affect the health and occupational safety of Mexican immigrants living in Edmonton, Canada.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.454
Threshold uncertainty score0.890

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.372 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Behavioral and Brain ScienceSame topicHealth, psychology, and well-beingFrench-language works237,207