Comparing the Life Satisfaction of Older Immigrants and Refugees to Canadian-Born Older Adults: The Role of Immigrant Admission Classes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Immigrant admission classes represent different entry routes to Canada and potential divergent pathways for later-life well-being. This study examined later-life satisfaction, an important correlate of well-being, comparing levels between Canadian-born older adults with those of older immigrants and refugees by admission class and considering the role of residency time in Canada. METHODS: This study used data from the Canadian Community Health Survey (2009-2014) linked to landing records for those 55 years and older. Regression models explored the association between admission class and later-life satisfaction adjusting for covariates and stratified by residency time in Canada. RESULTS: After accounting for a range of demographic, socioeconomic, and health characteristics, economic class principal applicants and refugees had significantly lower life satisfaction than Canadian-born older adults. The negative association with life satisfaction among economic class principal applicants persisted even after accounting for residency time in Canada. CONCLUSIONS: Both admission class and length of residency in Canada are associated with levels of later-life satisfaction. Future studies should look beyond aggregated measures of immigrant status when examining determinants of well-being in later-life. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Vulnerable subgroups of immigrants and refugees are at risk of experiencing lower later-life satisfaction and adverse later-life outcomes.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".