Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many African immigrants moving to Canada tend to experience deterioration of health with time in their host country due to the influence of multiple factors on their health care decisions. The purpose of this study was to understand the problems and decision dynamics relevant to Ghanaian adult immigrants’ health care choices with the first five to ten years of arrival in Calgary, Alberta. This research used a qualitative naturalistic approach with ten Ghanaian adult immigrants. Thematic analysis revealed that participants’ healthcare choices were influenced by their pre-and post-migration experiences, which informed their pathways to care. Participants provided insights about tensions among themselves and with health providers in making healthcare choices as they settled in a new environment. Further, there is a need to provide health education programs and a strong support system to facilitate better health choices and encourage health care service use among recent newcomers. The purpose of this study was to fully understand the problems and decision dynamics relevant to Ghanaian adult immigrants’ health care choices within the first 5 to 10 years of arrival. This research used qualitative inquiry approach to gather data from participants. A total of ten (10) participants were individually interviewed with open-ended, in-depth questions guided by social constructivist theory.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".