Health behaviour in the face of cultural conflict: perceptions of immigrant Muslim women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to describe immigrant Muslim women’s perceived barriers and facilitators to health behaviours relating to the interface between the cultural backgrounds of the participants and the predominant culture in Canada. Design/methodology/approach A case study approach was taken to conduct ten in-depth semi-structured interviews followed by three focus groups with immigrant women in Winnipeg, Canada. A demographic questionnaire, acculturation scale, and interview guides were used for data collection. Constant comparison analytic method was utilised to extract and refine themes. Findings A total of 32 adult Muslim women who had emigrated from 14 countries in Asia and Africa participated in this study. Most of the participants had medium to high levels of acculturation and enculturation. Through the in-depth analysis of the participants’ insights, these factors emerged as determinants of health behaviours related to cultural interactions: changes in gender role, mistrusting the unfamiliar, feelings of alienation, new construction of time, and reconstruction of private and public spheres. These themes display the participants’ conceptual and practical adaptations in Canada. Research limitations/implications The perspectives of those with poor spoken English language skill and the participants’ history of immigration were not obtained in this study limiting the study’s findings. Practical implications This paper reveals factors that potentially influence immigrant Muslim women’s health behaviours and should be considered when designing health promotion programs for similar groups. Originality/value This is the first paper focusing on cultural determinants of immigrant Muslim women’s health behaviour in a non-metropolitan Canadian city. Findings can help health promoters design culturally competent programs for this growing population to garner its greater participation.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".