MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7116959814 · doi:10.1186/s12889-025-25968-z

Self-reported health status and associated factors among community-dwelling Afro-Caribbean Black Canadians: a cross-sectional comparison before and during the pandemic

2025· article· en· W7116959814 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Anna Pefoyo Koné, Notisha Massaquoi, Lana Ray, Helen Gabriel, Adam Banner, Djemaa Samia Mechakra-Tahiri, Wangari Tharao, Constant Z. Ouapo, Efuange Khumbah, Adejisola Atiba, Dada Gasirabo, Mavis Nsong, Marlène Rémy Thélusma

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Public Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMigration, Health and Trauma
Canadian institutionsOntario Medical AssociationThe Scarborough HospitalBrampton Civic HospitalWomen's Health In Women's HandsFord Motor Company (Canada)Collège BoréalOntario Centre of Excellence for Child and Youth Mental HealthAthabasca UniversityEastern Ontario Training BoardMilton District HospitalUniversity of TorontoLakehead University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMental healthBiostatisticsPublic healthPandemicSocial determinants of healthRace and healthHealth equityEpidemiologyParticipatory action researchSocioeconomic status

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Social Determinants of Health are linked to health outcomes. Racial discrimination can lead to marginalization, poor quality of care, and racial inequities in health outcomes. The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated pre-existing health, social, and economic disparities within marginalized communities. However, data focusing on Canadian Black populations are limited. This study aims to identify how the pandemic impacted the health of Black communities and to identify associated factors, both prior to and during the pandemic, to inform areas for action and service planning. METHODS: This community-based cross-sectional study included English- or French-speaking Canadians self-identifying as African, Caribbean, or Black, in the Greater Toronto Area. The survey collected data from November 2022 to May 2023 on sociodemographic and clinical factors, and perceived health status. Data were based on retrospective self-reports. Such self-reported data are relevant to participatory research methods that require participatory data. Perceived general and mental health status, overall and by characteristics, was described. Key factors associated with perceived health before and during the pandemic were explored using multivariable logistic analysis. RESULTS: 388 individuals, aged 1–74 years, were included, mostly English-speaking and non-Canadian-born. Respectively 81% and 76% indicated their general and mental health as good or excellent before the pandemic, compared to 49% and 45% during the pandemic. University education (OR = 3.25), physical activity (OR = 2.87) and multimorbidity (OR = 0.15) were significantly associated with self-reported general health before the pandemic, while more factors, including immigration status, age, employment status, and insurance coverage, contributed to mental health perception. During the pandemic, women reported good/excellent general health or mental health 50–60% less often than men. Multimorbidity, immigration status, and household income were also associated with general health. French-speaking Black Canadians reported a lower proportion of good/excellent mental health, but those privately insured or physically active reported 3 times higher proportions of good or excellent mental health. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides needed health status information from a community-based sample of Black Canadians prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic and explores how social determinants of health vary in different contexts. A comparison before and during the pandemic and community involvement strengthened this cross-sectional study.

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)0.001
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 score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.113

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.307 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Public Health→Same topicMigration, Health and Trauma→French-language works237,207→