MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3155982957 · doi:10.32920/ihtp.v1i1.1419

Invisible diaspora: A scoping review of migrant caregivers’ social integration trajectory

2021· review· en· W3155982957 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Oona St-Amant, Mandana Vahabi, Josephine Pui‐Hing Wong, Bukola Salami, Kenneth Fung, Jovana Miholjcic, Valerie Tan

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Health Trends and Perspectives · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration and Labor Dynamics
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity of AlbertaPublic Health OntarioYork UniversityUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of TorontoToronto Metropolitan University
FundersInstitute of Gender and HealthCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsDiasporaGrassrootsAccountabilityDeskillingPsychological resiliencePolitical scienceSocial exclusionPublic relationsEconomic growthSociologyPsychologyGender studiesSocial psychologyWork (physics)Economics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The Canadian Caregiver program, initiated in 1992, functions to conceal the inadequate public policy and programs on child and elder care in Canada. Consequently, migrant caregivers have become an invisible diaspora filling a domestic labour gap with few protections. Aim and Methods: This scoping review aims to identify the systemic barriers that undermine social integration of migrant caregivers. We searched ten publication index databases from 2001-2020. We retrieved 1,624 articles, after accounting for exclusion criteria, 22 peer-reviewed articles were selected for this review representing migrant women across Canada who are and/or were part of the program. Results: Four key barriers were identified: economic exploitation, deskilling and downward occupational mobility, asymmetrical accountability, and social isolation. Conclusion: Discriminatory policies and hidden exploitative employment practices of the Canadian Caregiver program perpetuate a cycle of marginalization. This review also found that community support groups and alliances function to promote resilience among migrant caregivers through community advocacy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.894
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.353 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Health Trends and PerspectivesSame topicMigration and Labor DynamicsFrench-language works237,207