Delayed Access to Medical Care and Psychological Distress among Chinese Immigrants in Canada during the Pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The psychological impact of medical care accessibility during the pandemic has been widely studied, but little attention has been given to Asian immigrants in Canada. This study aimed to fill this literature gap by using a cross-sectional survey, which aimed to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on Chinese immigrants in North America during the second wave of the pandemic. The study focused on Chinese immigrants aged 16 or older in Canada. Covariates included sociodemographic variables, delayed access to medical care (i.e., treatment or health assessment), and other COVID-19 related variables. We used logistic LASSO regression for model selection and multivariate logistic regression models to evaluate the association between delayed access to treatment/health assessment and psychological distress outcome, as measured by the COVID-19 Peritraumatic Distress Index (CPDI). Missing data were handled using multiple imputation. Our study included 746 respondents, with 47.18% in the normal CPDI group and 36.82% in the mild-to-severe CPDI group. Most respondents were originally from Mainland China and residing in Ontario. Over half have stayed in Canada for at least 15 years. The multivariate logistic regression models identified significant risk predictors of psychological distress status: delayed access to medical care (OR = 1.362, 95% CI: 1.078–1.720, p = 0.0095), fear of COVID-19 (OR = 1.604, 95% CI: 1.293–1.989, p < 0.0001), and social loneliness (OR = 1.408, 95%CI: 1.314–1.508, p < 0.0001). Sociodemographic variables and other COVID-19-related variates did not significantly impact the study’s outcome. Our findings shed light on the importance of timely medical care access to psychological well-being among Chinese Canadians. Reliable health information, mental health support, and virtual care tailored to immigrants should be considered to mitigate this impact and promote their overall health and well-being.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".