MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4404543596 · doi:10.1186/s12889-024-20568-9

Factors associated with the perception of resentment towards the Chinese in Latin America during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic

2024· article· en· W4404543596 on OpenAlexaff
Christian R. Mejía, Gianpool Ascarza, Aldo Álvarez-Risco, Jean Misayauri, Dennis Arias-Chávez, Martín A. Vilela-Estrada, Víctor Serna-Alarcón, Tatiana Requena, Milward Ubillús, Shyla Del-Aguila-Arcentales, Neal M. Davies, Jaime A. Yáñez

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Public Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCOVID-19 and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResentmentMedicineBiostatisticsLatin AmericansPandemicDemographyPublic healthValue (mathematics)PopulationCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Environmental healthDiseaseInternal medicineSociologyPolitical scienceNursingStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Resentment towards the Chinese population was perceived during the first months of the pandemic because the pandemic/disease started in that country. OBJECTIVE: To determine the factors associated with the perception of resentment towards the Chinese in Latin America during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODOLOGY: Analytical cross-sectional study conducted during the second semester of the pandemic in more than a dozen countries. Four questions were asked about the perception of resentment towards the Chinese (Cronbach's Alpha: 0.88); those with the highest scores on the sum of the four questions were considered to have "more resentment towards the Chinese," and descriptive and analytical statistics were obtained. RESULTS: Of the 7721 respondents, in the multivariate analysis, it was found that there was a difference according to the country; compared to Peru, those who had more resentment towards the Chinese were those residing in Paraguay (aPR: 1.29; 95%CI: 1.17-1.42; p-value < 0.001) and Bolivia (aPR: 1.52; 95%CI: 1.37-1.68; p-value < 0.001), while Chile (aPR: 0.78; 95%CI: 0.69-0.88; p-value < 0.001) had less resentment: 0.69-0.88; p-value < 0.001), Mexico (aPR: 0.68; 95%CI: 0.57-0.80; p-value < 0.001), Panama (aPR: 0.71; 95%CI: 0.59-0.86; p-value < 0.001) and Costa Rica (aPR: 0.64; 95%CI: 0.49-0.85; p-value = 0.002). DISCUSSION: There was a significant difference in resentment for each country.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.201
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Public Health→Same topicCOVID-19 and Mental Health→French-language works237,207→