A cross-sectional study of organized activity participation and emotional wellbeing among non-immigrant and immigrant-origin children in British Columbia, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Organized activity participation has been linked to children’s emotional wellbeing. However, a scarcity of literature considers the role of immigrant background. This study’s primary objective was to measure the association between organized activity participation and emotional wellbeing among a population-based sample of Grade 7 children in British Columbia, Canada. We also examined whether this relationship depended on immigration background. Our sample included 14,406 children (47.8% female; mean age = 12.0 years). 9,393 (65.2%) children were of non-immigrant origin (48.9% female; mean age = 12.1 years). 5,013 children (34.8%) were of immigrant origin (45.8% female; mean age = 12.0 years; 40.8% first-generation). Participants completed the Middle Years Development Instrument, a self-report survey measuring children’s wellbeing and assets. We used odds ratios and the χ2 test to compare the organized activity participation of non-immigrant and immigrant-origin children. We used multiple linear regression to measure associations between participation and indicators of emotional wellbeing and assessed whether associations varied based on immigrant background, controlling for demographic factors and peer belonging. Participation in any activity was similar among non-immigrant and immigrant-origin children (OR1st-gen=1.06, p=0.37; OR2nd-gen=0.97, p=0.62). Immigrant generation status modified the relationship between participation and emotional wellbeing (χSWL2=3.69, p=0.03; χDep2=12.31, p<0.01). Beneficial associations between participation and both life satisfaction and depressive symptoms were observed among non-immigrant children only, although associations were small. We conclude that immigrant background modestly modified the association between organized activity participation and emotional wellbeing.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".