MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399359264 · doi:10.1186/s12875-024-02453-x

Barriers to primary care among immigrants and refugees in Peterborough, Ontario: a qualitative study of provider perspectives

2024· article· en· W4399359264 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Madura Sundareswaran, Lucas Martignetti, Eva Purkey

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Primary Care · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMigration, Health and Trauma
Canadian institutionsTrent UniversityQueen's University
FundersQueen's UniversityCollege of Family Physicians of Canada
KeywordsRefugeeThematic analysisImmigrationFocus groupHealth careQualitative researchPopulationNursingPublic relationsMedicinePolitical scienceBusinessSociologyEnvironmental healthMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Canada's immigrants and refugees have often settled in large Canadian cities, but this is changing with rising costs of living and rural settlement initiatives. However, little consideration is made regarding systemic changes needed to accommodate this distribution, particularly in healthcare in medium-sized cities or smaller communities. For most Canadians, primary care is an entry point into the healthcare system but immigrants and refugees face unique barriers to accessing care compared to the general Canadian population. This project aimed to better understand the barriers to accessing primary care among newcomers in Peterborough, Ontario from the perspective of newcomer service providers. METHODOLOGY: Participants were recruited from community organizations identified by the local settlement agency, the New Canadians Centre, as having regular interactions with newcomer clients including clinics, not-for-profit organizations, and volunteer groups. Four focus groups were completed, each with three participants (n=12). A coding grid was deductively developed to guide thematic analysis by adapting Levesque et al.'s conceptual framework defining access to healthcare with five specific dimensions: approachability, acceptability, availability and accommodation, affordability, and appropriateness. RESULTS: Participants identified lack of awareness of the healthcare system, stigma, competing priorities, and direct costs as some of the barriers for newcomers. Participants highlighted barriers unique to Peterborough including proximity to services, social isolation, and a shortage of family physicians. The results also highlighted strengths in the community such as its maternal-child health programming. CONCLUSION: The results provide a glimpse of the challenges to accessing primary care among newcomers in medium-sized communities and identify opportunities to prepare for changing settlement patterns.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.135
Threshold uncertainty score0.271

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0160.008
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.325 · 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

Citations13
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Primary CareSame topicMigration, Health and TraumaFrench-language works237,207