The effect of stress and acculturation on the self-rated health of Arab Americans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The self-rated health of Arab Americans has been found to be worse than non-Hispanic whites. Psychosocial factors such as stress and acculturation may explain this disparity. As a result, we designed this survey to better understand the effects of stress and acculturation on the self-rated health of the Arab-American community. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using a convenience sample, we surveyed 142 self-identified Arab Americans regarding demographics, stress, acculturation, and self-rated health. Stress was measured using instruments assessing perceived stress, everyday discrimination, and acculturative stress. Acculturation was measured using a modified Vancouver Index of Acculturation. To measure self-rated health, participants were asked to rate their current health on a scale of 1 (very poor) to 5 (very good). RESULTS: A logistic regression model adjusted for age, sex, body mass index, and education did not find that stress significantly affected the odds of having poor self-rated health in Arab Americans. Heritage identity was associated with lower odds of having poor self-rated health (odds ratio = 0.37, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.15, 0.94, P < 0.05). No association was found between acculturation and poor self-rated health. CONCLUSION: Greater levels of stress were not significantly associated with greater odds of poor self-rated health in Arab Americans. We also found that greater heritage identity significantly decreased the odds of poor self-rated health in Arab Americans. The effects of everyday discrimination, perceived stress, and acculturation on self-rated health in Arab Americans remain unclear and need to be examined further.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".