Estimated number of persons by quarter of a year and by year, Canada, provinces and territories.

Canada's most populous province, Ontario, had 188 315 Aboriginal people in 2001, the highest absolute number. However, they accounted for less than 2% of its total population. Second was British Columbia with 170 025, or 4.4% of its population. As in previous censuses, the highest concentrations of Aboriginal population in 2001 were in the North and on the Prairies.

Individuals in different life stages have different intentions and reasons for migration, which leads to differences in the spatial patterns of migration across age groups. This paper aims to reveal the different patterns of inter-provincial migration across age groups and the underlying driving factors to foster a deeper understanding of migration phenomena in China and support an appropriate policy response. Using data from the 2017 China Migrants Dynamic Survey and an extended gravity model with lasso-penalized Poisson regression, we reveal significant heterogeneity in migration patterns among different age groups. In terms of spatial patterns, while people of all age groups tend to migrate from less developed regions to more developed regions, the migration flows of the working-age population are primarily short-distance relocations from populous central provinces to economically developed areas, whereas elderly individuals migrate predominantly from northern regions to Beijing and from southern regions to Shanghai. In terms of influencing factors, while economic considerations drive migration across all age groups, economic opportunities play a significantly stronger role in the working-age population. In contrast, elderly individuals tend to prioritize environmental comfort in their destination choices and are less constrained by distance.

IntroductionImmigrants were disproportionately impacted by COVID-19 and experience unique vaccination barriers. In Canada (37 million people), 23% of the population is foreign-born. Immigrants constitute 60% of the country’s racialized (non-white) population and over half of immigrants reside in Ontario, the country’s most populous province. Ontario had several strategies aimed at improving vaccine equity including geographic targeting of vaccine supply and clinics, as well as numerous community-led efforts. Our objectives were to (1) compare primary series vaccine coverage after it was widely available, and first booster coverage 6 months after its availability, between immigrants and other Ontario residents and (2) identify subgroups experiencing low coverage.Materials and methodsUsing linked immigration and health administrative data, we conducted a retrospective population-based cohort study including all community-dwelling adults in Ontario, Canada as of January 1, 2021. We compared primary series (two-dose) vaccine coverage by September 2021, and first booster (three-dose) coverage by March 2022 among immigrants and other Ontarians, and across sociodemographic and immigration characteristics. We used multivariable log-binomial regression to estimate adjusted risk ratios (aRR).ResultsOf 11,844,221 adults, 22% were immigrants. By September 2021, 72.6% of immigrants received two doses (vs. 76.4%, other Ontarians) and by March 2022 46.1% received three doses (vs. 58.2%). Across characteristics, two-dose coverage was similar or slightly lower, while three-dose coverage was much lower, among immigrants compared to other Ontarians. Across neighborhood SARS-CoV-2 risk deciles, differences in two-dose coverage were smaller in higher risk deciles and larger in the lower risk deciles; with larger differences across all deciles for three-dose coverage. Compared to other Ontarians, immigrants from Central Africa had the lowest two-dose (aRR = 0.60 [95% CI 0.58–0.61]) and three-dose coverage (aRR = 0.36 [95% CI 0.34–0.37]) followed by Eastern Europeans and Caribbeans, while Southeast Asians were more likely to receive both doses. Compared to economic immigrants, resettled refugees and successful asylum-claimants had the lowest three-dose coverage (aRR = 0.68 [95% CI 0.68–0.68] and aRR = 0.78 [95% CI 0.77–0.78], respectively).ConclusionTwo dose coverage was more equitable than 3. Differences by immigrant region of birth were substantial. Community-engaged approaches should be re-invigorated to close gaps and promote the bivalent booster.