MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2625418323 · doi:10.1200/jop.2016.019497

Impact of Immigration Status on Cancer Outcomes in Ontario, Canada

2017· article· en· W2625418323 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Matthew C. Cheung, Craig C. Earle, Hadas D. Fischer, Ximena Camacho, Ning Liu, Refik Saskin, Baiju R. Shah, Peter C. Austin, Simron Singh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Oncology Practice · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMigration, Health and Trauma
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesSunnybrook Health Science CentreOntario Institute for Cancer Research
FundersOntario Ministry of Health and Long-Term CareInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesAmerican Society of Clinical Oncology
KeywordsMedicineImmigrationDemographyHazard ratioCancerProportional hazards modelSocioeconomic statusCohortCohort studyGerontologyInternal medicinePopulationEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Prior studies have documented inferior health outcomes in vulnerable populations, including racial minorities and those with disadvantaged socioeconomic status. The impact of immigration on cancer-related outcomes is less clear. METHODS: Administrative databases were linked to create a cohort of incident cancer cases (colorectal, lung, prostate, head and neck, breast, and hematologic malignancies) from 2000 to 2012 in Ontario, Canada. Cancer patients who immigrated to Canada (from 1985 onward) were compared with those who were Canadian born (or immigrated before 1985). Patients were followed from diagnosis until death (cancer-specific or all-cause). Cox proportional hazards models were estimated to determine the impact of immigration on mortality after adjusting for explanatory variables. Additional adjusted models studied the relationship of time since immigration and cancer-specific and overall mortality. RESULTS: From 2000 to 2012, 11,485 cancer cases were diagnosed in recent immigrants (0 to 10 years in Canada), 17,844 cases in nonrecent immigrants (11 to 25 years), and 416,118 cases in nonimmigrants. After adjustment, the hazard of mortality was lower for recent immigrants (hazard ratio [HR], 0.843; 95% CI, 0.814 to 0.873) and nonrecent immigrants (HR, 0.902; 95% CI, 0.876 to 0.928) compared with nonimmigrants. Cancer-specific mortality was also lower for recent immigrants (HR, 0.857; 95% CI, 0.823 to 0.893) and nonrecent immigrants (HR, 0.907; 95% CI, 0.875 to 0.94). Among immigrants, each year from the original landing was associated with increased mortality (HR, 1.004; 95% CI, 1.000 to 1.009) and a trend to increased cancer-specific mortality (HR, 1.005; 95% CI, 0.999 to 1.010). CONCLUSION: Immigrants demonstrate a healthy immigrant effect, with lower cancer-specific mortality compared with Canadian-born individuals. This benefit seems to diminish over time, as the survival of immigrants from common cancers potentially converges with the Canadian norm.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.328

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.467
Teacher spread0.413 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations41
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Oncology PracticeSame topicMigration, Health and TraumaFrench-language works237,207