Reported immigration and medical coercion among immigrants referred to a cultural consultation service
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Members of visible minorities are commonly targets of social coercion related to immigration and medical measures. Social coercion is associated with poor mental health outcomes and mistrust of medical services. This study will determine if Afro-Canadian immigrants referred to a Cultural Consultation Service (CCS) in Montreal report more or less medical and immigration coercion compared with other ethnic minorities. We reviewed the charts of 729 referrals to the CCS and gathered data on the 401 patients included in the study. Chi-square statistics examined the relation between minority group and self-reported coercion. Binary logistic regression models controlled for standard sociodemographic variables in addition to ethnicity, language barrier, length of stay in Canada since immigration, refugee claimant status, referral source, presence of psychosis in the main diagnosis, and presence of legal history. Patients were diverse and included 105 Afro-Canadians, 40 Latin Americans, 73 Arab and West Asians, 149 South Asians, and 34 East and Southeast Asians. Being Afro-Canadian was significantly and positively associated with medical coercion (p = .02, 95% CI = 1.15-4.57), while being South Asian was negatively and significantly associated with immigration coercion (p = .03, 95% CI = .29-.93). Members of visible minority communities are not equal in their reported experience of social coercion after arriving to Canada. Future research clarifying pathways to mental health care for immigrants and the experience of new Canadians in immigration and health care settings would give needed context to the findings of this study.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".