“When you add Black and Female, it’s almost like a double whammy”: The Gendered and Racialized Experiences of Professional Integration among Internationally Educated Health Professionals in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Scholars have noted that migration of health professionals is a global phenomenon. According to the World Health Organization, the immigration of internationally educated health professionals (IEHPs) to Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries has increased in the past decade by 60 percent (WHO, 2022). Canada is one of the OECD countries that IEHPs may find attractive. While academics have identified the many barriers for professional integration IEHPs in Canada, there is a gap in the literature in relation to how gender shapes the experiences of professional integration within the Canadian context. My thesis aimed to fill this gap in the literature. \nSpecific Aims: The specific aim of the study was to determine how gender and race shape the professional integration experiences of IEHPs in Canada by focusing on the intersection of gender, race and ethnicity. \nMethods: The study employed a qualitative research design and was informed by feminist methodology. Theoretically, the research was grounded in the theory of intersectionality. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 IEHPs. The analysis applied Winker & Degele’s (2011) framework for an intersectional multi-level analysis. \nResults: Six stories of IEHPs working in different fields of the Canadian health care setting are featured in the results to describe the participants’ experiences. The stories draw on comparisons with other participants’ accounts and illuminate the complexity of the immigration process and the institutional barriers to professional integration. They also show how race and country of education shape the process of professional integration. Lastly, the stories illustrate how gendered roles, and in particular motherhood, shape the process of professional integration of IEHPs, while revealing the unique challenges IEHPs who are also women of colour may encounter. \nConclusion: The results from the study illustrate how the intersection of gender, race and professional identity create unique contexts for IEHPs, as they seek out their professional integration. This study is one of the first studies to explore how gender shapes professional integration of internationally educated health professionals within Canada . The findings of the study illustrate how social identities may enable or hinder peoples’ experiences of professional integration. Lastly, the study demonstrates how racist ideologies are embedded in regulatory policies and practices and hinder professional integration of some IEHPs.
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 | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.051 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".