MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7161942073 · doi:10.82308/41872

We are what we are: Religious discrimination and oral health care among Muslim people in Montreal

2020· dissertation· en· W7161942073 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Madhura Tandale

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural Competency in Health Care
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIslamPrayerReligious discriminationThematic analysisAffect (linguistics)Health careEthnic groupMental healthExploratory researchGovernment (linguistics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The Muslim people are the second-largest religious group in Canada and represent approximately 3.2 per cent of the population. Since the Bouchard-Taylor commission on ''reasonable accommodation'' of minorities in Quebec, Muslim people have been at the forefront of the debate on religious signs and symbols. They have also faced discrimination and even violence; the Quebec City mosque shooting in 2017 being an example. While there is a large body of research on the impact of racial and ethnic discrimination on physical and mental health, very little is known about the impact of religious discrimination. In particular, we know very little about how experiencing religious discrimination may affect people's oral health and oral health-related behaviors.Research Question: How does religious discrimination affect the oral health care of Muslim people?Methodology: We conducted a qualitative exploratory study within the Muslim people of Montreal, Quebec. We adopted a maximum variation sampling strategy regarding age, sex, education level, marital status, and employment status. We collected our data through face-to-face, in-depth, semi-structured interviews of 11 participants practicing Islam. The interviews were audio - recorded and transcribed verbatim to be analyzed. Data analysis was carried out by using a thematic analysis approach, which allowed us to provide a detailed description of the phenomenon.Results: The participants experienced religious discrimination in three different settings, most commonly in daily life but also in the healthcare and the dental healthcare systems. The participants experienced discrimination in the form of verbal, non-verbal, physical aggression related to Islamic clothing and prayer rituals in public places (metro station, streets, bus, etc.). These experiences had a major impact on their life, including stress and anxiety, feelings of insecurity, and, in some cases, emigration to escape discrimination. Some participants experienced negative behaviors and disinterest from healthcare and non-healthcare professionals (receptionists), which generated a lack of trust in healthcare professionals in general. Three participants had similar experiences during their dental visits that led them to lose trust in dentists and, ultimately, avoid dental visits.Conclusion: In sum, our findings showed that religious discrimination had an impact on the mental health of the Muslim people through stress and anxiety. It may have an impact on the use of dental care services and access to care. And this, in turn, may negatively impact oral health. We were unable to determine the impact of psychological stress and anxiety on oral health-related behaviors such as diet and oral hygiene

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.210

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.316 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCultural Competency in Health CareFrench-language works237,207