MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2969204269 · doi:10.2196/11998

Associations Between Immigration-Related User Factors and eHealth Activities for Self-Care: Case of First-Generation Immigrants From Pakistan in the Oslo Area, Norway

2019· article· en· W2969204269 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Naoe Tatara, Hugo L. Hammer, Jelena Mirković, Marte Karoline Råberg Kjøllesdal, Hege Andreassen

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Public Health and Surveillance · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Literacy and Information Accessibility
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordseHealthHealth carePopulationMedicineImmigrationDigital divideInformation and Communications TechnologyGerontologyEnvironmental healthGeographyWorld Wide WebComputer sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Immigrant populations are often disproportionally affected by chronic diseases, such as type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Use of information and communication technology (ICT) is one promising approach for better self-care of T2DM to mitigate the social health inequalities, if designed for a wider population. However, knowledge is scarce about immigrant populations' diverse electronic health (eHealth) activities for self-care, especially in European countries. OBJECTIVE: With a target group of first-generation immigrants from Pakistan in the Oslo area, Norway, we aimed to understand their diverse eHealth activities for T2DM self-care in relation to immigration-related user factors specific to this target group: proficiency in relevant languages (Urdu, Norwegian, English), length of residence in Norway, and diagnosis of T2DM compared with general user factors (age, gender, education and digital skills, and self-rated health status). METHODS: Data were from a survey among the target population (N=176) conducted in 2015-2016. Using logistic regression, we analyzed associations between user factors and experiences of each of the following eHealth activities for T2DM self-care in the last 12 months: first, information seeking by (1) search engines and (2) Web portals or email subscriptions; second, communication and consultation (1) by closed conversation with a few acquaintances using ICT and (2) on social network services; and third, active decision making by using apps for (1) tracking health information and (2) self-assessment of health status. Using Poisson regression, we also assessed the relationship between user factors and variety of eHealth activities experienced. The Bonferroni correction was used to address the multiple testing problem. RESULTS: Regression analyses yielded the following significantly positive associations: between Urdu literacy and (1) information seeking by Web portals or email subscriptions (odds ratio [OR] 2.155, 95% CI 1.388-3.344), (2) communication and consultation on social network services (OR 5.697, 95% CI 2.487-13.053), and (3) variety (estimate=0.350, 95% CI 0.148-0.552); between length of residence in Norway and (1) communication and consultation by closed conversation with a few acquaintances using ICT (OR 1.728, 95% CI 1.193-2.503), (2) communication and consultation on social network services (OR 2.098, 95% CI 1.265-3.480), and (3) variety (estimate=0.270, 95% CI 0.117-0.424); between Norwegian language proficiency and active decision making by using apps for self-assessment of health status (OR 2.285, 95% CI 1.294-4.036); between education and digital skills and active decision making by using apps for tracking health information (OR 3.930, 95% CI 1.627-9.492); and between being a female and communication and consultation by closed conversation with a few acquaintances using ICT (OR 2.883, 95% CI 1.335-6.227). CONCLUSIONS: This study implies immigration-related factors may confound associations between general user factors and eHealth activities. Further studies are needed to explore the influence of immigration-related user factors for eHealth activities in other immigrant groups and countries. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT: RR2-DOI 10.2196/resprot.5468.

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 score0.135
Threshold uncertainty score0.269

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.339 · 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

Citations11
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Public Health and SurveillanceSame topicHealth Literacy and Information AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207