Examining preconception care-related knowledge and attitudes among Chinese immigrants in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine knowledge and attitudes about preconception health care among Chinese immigrants in Canada. Design/methodology/approach A cross-sectional internet-based survey, informed by the principles of the health belief model, was administered to a convenience sample in Ottawa, Canada. In total, 76 respondents from the Chinese community participated in the online survey. Findings Overall, participants demonstrated: low to moderate awareness of preconception related risk factors and preconception health; neutral to slightly positive attitudes toward carrying out preconception care; considerable confusion over the differences among preconception care, premarital health care (Mainland China), and prenatal health care; great sensitivity to subjective norms related to spouses, parents, and friends; and a strong desire for receiving information and communication from health care professionals. Practical implications An emphasis on reducing misperceptions and offering information about the preconception period and potential severe pregnancy-related risks may contribute to a better knowledge and intended behavior toward preconception care among Chinese immigrants, and ultimately optimize both their reproductive health and their future children’s health. Originality/value The cultural norms and population policies in the sending country may frame immigrants’ knowledge and attitudes related to preconception health care. This study fills the gap in the literature regarding Chinese immigrants’ knowledge levels and attitudes toward preconception care in Canada and thus offers insights into how to deliver culturally competent care and design effective communication strategies to reach out to ethnocultural communities.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".