The Work-Life Experiences of Black African Immigrant Nurses in Vancouver: Everyday Racisms and Acts of Resistance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This analysis is based on semi-structured interviews examining the work–life experiences of Black African immigrant nurses in Vancouver, British Columbia, conducted from June 2013 to June 2014. The article argues that nurses experience systemic barriers in which their sense of Canadian belonging and professionalism are called into question by patients, colleagues, and managers. Using the framing device of everyday racism, findings suggest that nurses navigate and counter these socio-cultural barriers by repurposing their daily actions into powerful subversive acts of resistance. The article uses the concept of everyday racism to relate the day-to-day experiences recounted by Black nurses to the larger macrostructural contexts that define the intersecting inequalities they describe. Grounded in Black Canadian feminist theory, this article contends that the lives of Black nurses offer critical insights to challenge structures of dominance. This article builds on existing scholarship discussing experiences of racism among Black and largely Caribbean nurses in Canada. The contribution is important because it offers the opportunity to analyze the lived realities of continental African nurses in Vancouver, in the historical context of a racialized Canadian state policy.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.031 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".