Social isolation and loneliness among immigrant and refugee seniors in Canada: a scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose Social isolation and loneliness are global issues experienced by many seniors, especially immigrant and refugee seniors. Guided by the five-stage methodological framework proposed by Arksey and O’Malley and more recently Levac, Colquhoun and O’Brien, the purpose of this paper is to explore the existing literature on social isolation and loneliness among immigrant and refugee seniors in Canada. Design/methodology/approach The authors conducted a literature search of several databases including: PubMed; MEDLINE; CINAHL; Web of Science; HealthStar Ovid; PschyInfo Ovid; Social Services Abstracts; AgeLine; Public Health Database, Google Scholar and Cochrane Library. In total, 17 articles met the inclusion criteria. Findings Based on the current literature five themes related to social isolation and loneliness emerged: loss; living arrangements; dependency; barriers and challenges; and family conflict. Research limitations/implications Given the increasing demographic of aging immigrants in Canada, it is useful to highlight existing knowledge on social isolation and loneliness to facilitate research, policy and programs to support this growing population. Practical implications The population is aging around the world and it is also becoming increasingly diverse particularly in the high-income country context. Understanding and addressing social isolation is important for immigrant and refugee seniors, given the sociocultural and other differences. Social implications Social isolation is a waste of human resource and value created by seniors in the communities. Originality/value The paper makes a unique contribution by focusing on immigrant and refugee seniors.
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 | 0.007 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.018 | 0.024 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".