MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2782124074 · doi:10.29173/cjs28365

Migration and Sexual Health Among Gay Latino Migrants to Canada

2017· article· en· W2782124074 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Barry D. Adam, J. Cristian Rangel

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Sociology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Windsor
FundersOntario HIV Treatment Network
KeywordsNexus (standard)ImmigrationGender studiesVulnerability (computing)SociologyHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Race (biology)Political scienceDemographic economicsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper enquires into the nexus of migration with sexual health among gay Latino migrants in Canada. Interviews with 25 Spanish-speaking interviewees are examined in light of models developed from studies of Latinos in the United States. Canadian immigration policy appears to result in a somewhat different selection of immigrants compared to the United States. Migrants come from a wide range of national and regional backgrounds intersected by race, generation, and social class that influence their perceptions of and adjustment to Canadian society. Pre-migration HIV knowledge varied strongly by generation with older men recalling public panic concerning HIV and younger men receiving formal education about it. Migration enters into the mix of conditions as kin ties can be less confidently relied on among gay men compared to their heterosexual counterparts and by exacerbating vulnerability among those seeking to develop new social and sexual networks.

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)0.002
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.146

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.303 · 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

Citations8
Published2017
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of SociologySame topicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and PolicyFrench-language works237,207