The psychosocial well-being of sub-Saharan African migrant parents in Ontario: a scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The primary objective of this scoping review is to evaluate the breadth of existing literature on the psychosocial well-being of sub-Saharan African (SSA) migrant parents living in Ontario, Canada. Ontario, the most populous province in Canada, has seen a significant influx of migrants from SSA in the past several years, with Nigeria and South Africa being the top countries of origin of Black African newcomers. Conditions resulting from overcrowding and provincial attempts to accommodate this influx have led to medium-sized cities, like Hamilton and Ottawa, and small communities becoming increasingly popular destinations for immigrants. This review was conducted according to the JBI guide on evidence synthesis and the results were organized and reported in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR). An extensive search strategy was developed for application across six databases: PubMed, Scopus, ProQuest, Web of Science, OVID, and CINAHL. The findings demonstrate high level of heterogeneity between studies, which were appraised independently by two researchers using the QuADS tool. 15 articles were included in the scoping review. The review revealed five major themes related to the psychosocial well-being of Black African migrant parents: (1) psychosocial well-being as a culturally embedded concept, (2) the politicization of health and its impact on psychosocial well-being, (3) generational dynamics and parenting challenges, (4) the interplay of trauma and resilience in the resettlement journey, and (5) agency and resourcefulness of Black African migrant parents.
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 | 0.010 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.018 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".