MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4378070122 · doi:10.1371/journal.pgph.0001156

Identity and COVID-19 in Canada: Gender, ethnicity, and minority status

2023· article· en· W4378070122 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Roland Pongou, Bright Opoku Ahinkorah, Marie Christelle Mabeu, Arunika Agarwal, Stéphanie Maltais, Aissata Boubacar Moumouni, Sanni Yaya

Bibliographic record

VenuePLOS Global Public Health · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCOVID-19 and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsPublic Health Agency of CanadaUniversity of Ottawa
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSocioeconomic statusEthnic groupDemographyLogistic regressionPsychological interventionOdds ratioDescriptive statisticsConfidence intervalOddsPandemicCross-sectional studyMedicineEnvironmental healthGeographyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PopulationDiseasePolitical scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, growing evidence from the United States, the United Kingdom, and China has demonstrated the unequal social and economic burden of this health crisis. Yet, in Canada, studies assessing the socioeconomic and demographic determinants of COVID-19, and how these determinants vary by gender and ethnic minority status, remain scarce. As new strains of COVID-19 emerge, it is important to understand the disparities to be able to initiate policies and interventions that target and prioritise the most at-risk sub-populations. AIM: The objective of this study is to assess the socioeconomic and demographic factors associated with COVID-19-related symptoms in Canada, and how these determinants vary by identity factors including gender and visible minority status. METHODS: We implemented an online survey and collected a nationally representative sample of 2,829 individual responses. The original data collected via the SurveyMonkey platform were analysed using a cross-sectional study. The outcome variables were COVID-19-related symptoms among respondents and their household members. The exposure variables were socioeconomic and demographic factors including gender and ethnicity as well as age, province, minority status, level of education, total annual income in 2019, and number of household members. Descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to test the associations. The results were presented as adjusted odds ratios (aORs) at p < 0.05 and a 95% confidence interval. RESULTS: We found that the odds of having COVID-19-related symptoms were higher among respondents who belong to mixed race [aOR = 2.77; CI = 1.18-6.48] and among those who lived in provinces other than Ontario and Quebec [aOR = 1.88; CI = 1.08-3.28]. There were no significant differences in COVID-19 symptoms between males and females, however, we did find a significant association between the province, ethnicity, and reported COVID-19 symptoms for female respondents but not for males. The likelihood of having COVID-19-related symptoms was also lower among respondents whose total income was $100,000 or more in 2019 [aOR = 0.18; CI = 0.07-0.45], and among those aged 45-64 [aOR = 0.63; CI = 0.41-0.98] and 65-84 [aOR = 0.42; CI = 0.28-0.64]. These latter associations were stronger among non-visible minorities. Among visible minorities, being black or of the mixed race and living in Alberta were associated with higher odds of COVID-19-related symptoms. CONCLUSION: We conclude that ethnicity, age, total income in 2019, and province were significantly associated with experiencing COVID-19 symptoms in Canada. The significance of these determinants varied by gender and minority status. Considering our findings, it will be prudent to have COVID-19 mitigation strategies including screening, testing, and other prevention policies targeted toward the vulnerable populations. These strategies should also be designed to be specific to each gender category and ethnic group, and to account for minority status.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.262
GPT teacher head0.461
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLOS Global Public HealthSame topicCOVID-19 and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207