MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4238730279 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14648124

Health perceptions and experiences of Cantonese-speaking older immigrant women from mainland China living in Toronto

2021· preprint· en· W4238730279 on OpenAlexaffabout
Alice W. Fong

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMigration, Health and Trauma
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationMainland ChinaQualitative researchPerceptionChinaMainlandSocial determinants of healthInequalityIntersectionalityGender studiesHealth careLanguage barrierSociologyGerontologyPsychologyMedicinePublic healthPolitical scienceNursingGeographySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Few health studies have been conducted in a non-official language with participants. In addition, few studies have attempted to discover the social determinants of health to account for health inequalities for immigrant women through qualitative interviews (Hyman, 2007). This study endeavoured to understand the perceptions of health and the experiences of healthcare services in Toronto by Cantonese-speaking older immigrant women. The study was conducted in their own language. In addition to the Cantonese-speaking older immigrant women, community workers who work with Chinese immigrant clients were also interviewed. The social determinants of health were divided into post-migration challenges and systemic barriers, then analyzed with an intersectional theoretical framework. This study highlights the importance of an intersectional approach since many social determinants influenced the participants' health experiences. Furthermore, this study underlines the need to advocate for immigrant health to take prominence in national health policy in Canada.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.197
Threshold uncertainty score0.397

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMigration, Health and Trauma→French-language works237,207→