Exploring the State of Gender-Centered Health Research in the Context of Refugee Resettlement in Canada: A Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Interdisciplinary health research that investigates gender as a relational process is necessary to facilitate a safe and healthy resettlement process for refugees in Canada. This scoping review explores the range, nature, and extent of published research examining gender in relation to refugee health during resettlement in Canada. An initial search of six databases yielded 7325 articles published before June 2019. A total of 34 articles published between 1988 and 2019 were included for in-depth review. Articles meeting inclusion criteria primarily focused on refugee women. Categories of focus included maternal health, social and emotional health, health impacts of sexual and gender-based violence and torture, access to health and social services, decision-making and health-seeking behavior, mental health, and sexual and reproductive health. Our thematic analysis identified connections between gender roles, expectations, ideals, and health through interactions and lived experiences within the family, community, and healthcare system. Review findings suggest that many refugee women are influenced by pervasive gender roles and expectations as well as exposed to gendered health systems and practices that may pose risks to health, particularly mental health and access to services. Further efforts should be made to understand processes and experiences of resilience and community building in countering negative impacts of gendered beliefs and practices on health during resettlement.
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 | 0.013 | 0.044 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.016 | 0.025 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 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".