Variations in perceived stress among Syrian refugee parents resettled through different sponsorship programs in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Little is known about the perceived stress level of Syrian Refugee (SR) parents residing in Canada specifically in relation to different sponsorship programs. This study aims to assess the relationship between the different sponsorship programs [Government-Assisted Refugees (GAR), Privately Sponsored Refugees (PSR) and Blended Visa Office-Referred refugees (BVOR)] and perceived stress among SR parents, with at least one child under the age of four, who resettled in the Greater Toronto area after 2015. METHODS: A convenience sample of 155 Syrian Refugee (SR) parents was recruited. Perceived levels of stress were measured using the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-10). Multiple linear regression analysis was performed to assess the independent relation between several types of sponsorship programs and PSS adjusting for demographic, economic and social factors. RESULTS: The overall average PSS score was found to be 12.5 ± 7.2 with BVORs presenting the highest level of moderate stress when compared to GARs and PSRs (75.0% compared to 39.5% and 35.2% respectively). Multivariate analysis showed that the mean PSS was significantly higher among BVORs when compared with GARs (Adj β = 4.8; 95% CI 0.4, 9.2). No significant difference in PSS levels was reported when PSRs were compered to GARs. Increased PSS scores were found to be associated with worse family functioning (Adj β = 4.2; 95% CI 1.0, 7.4), while decreased PSS scores were associated with increased age (Adj β = -0.4; 95% CI -0.6, -0.1). CONCLUSION: A better understanding of the various underlying factors associated with elevated stress is essential for improving the quality of life for SRs in Canada. Results of the study may help tailor more effective preventative measures or government interventions dedicated to reducing stress levels among this population.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".