<|begin_of_text|><|start_header_id|>system<|end_header_id|>You are an expert on climate change, human mobility and migration. Answer the question truthfully.<|eot_id|><|start_header_id|>user<|end_header_id|>Here are the title and abstract of a scientific paper probably related to climate change, human mobility and migration..
Title:"A Global Meta-analysis of the Immigrant Mortality Advantage."
Abstract:"A large body of research on the Healthy Immigrant Effect (or Paradox) has reported an immigrant mortality advantage. However, other studies do not find such significant effects, and some even present contradictory evidence. This article is the first systematic meta-analysis that investigates the immigration-mortality relationship from a global perspective, examining 1,933 all-cause and cardiovascular mortality risk estimates from 103 publications. Our comprehensive analysis allows us to assess interactions between origin and destination regions and to reexamine, on a global scale, some of the most notable explanations for the immigrant mortality advantage, including suggestions that this paradox may be primarily the result of selection effects. We find evidence for the existence of a mild immigrant mortality advantage for working-age individuals. However, the relationship holds only for immigrants who moved between certain world regions, particularly those who immigrated from Northern Africa, Asia, and Southern Europe to richer countries. The results highlight the need in the broader migration literature for an increased focus on selection effects and on outcomes for people who chose not to migrate or who were denied entry into their planned destination country.."
I have six questions you need to answer.
Q1: Is this article is about 'human migration mobility': 1 = yes; 0 = no. Answer with a number. Do not give a textual explanation.

Q2: What drivers of migration and mobility does the article study? 0 = 'other', 1 = 'climate', 2 = 'environment', 3 = 'economic', 4 = 'conflict', 5 = 'political', 6 = 'social', 7 = 'family'. Answer with a number or a sequence of numbers separated by commas. Do not give a textual explanation. 

Q3: What is the overall sentiment of the article?:0 = 'neutral', 1 = 'negative', 2 = 'positive'. Answer with a number. Do not give a textual explanation.

Q4: What type of climate or environmental keywords are explicitly mentioned?:  0 = 'none', 1 = 'algal blooms', 2 = 'infestation', 3 = 'infectious diseases', 4 = 'ocean acidification', 5 = 'sea ice', 6 = 'acid rain', 7 = 'drought', 8 = 'cold wave', 9 = 'heat wave', 10 = 'glacial', 11 = 'wildfire', 12 = 'air pollution', 13 = 'biodiversity loss', 14 = 'coastal erosion', 15 = 'land degradation', 16 = 'deforestation', 17 = 'desertification', 18 = 'water pollution', 19 = 'diebacks', 20 = 'permafrost loss', 21 = 'sand mining', 22 = 'sea level rise', 23 = 'earthquake', 24 = 'tsunami', 25 = 'volcanic', 26 = 'flood', 27 = 'avalanche', 28 = 'landslide', 29 = 'downburst', 30 = 'thunderstorm', 31 = 'sandstorm', 32 = 'haze', 33 = 'storm', 34 = 'cyclone', 35 = 'blizzard', 36 = 'hail', 37 = 'snow', 38 = 'tornado', 39 = 'wind', 40 = 'hurricane', 41 = 'typhoon', 42 = 'other'. Answer with a number or a sequence of numbers separated by commas. Do not give a textual explanation. 

Q5: What discipline does the article belong to?: 0 = 'other', 1 = 'social science', 2 = 'natural science', 3 = 'arts and humanities', 4 = 'multidiscipline and interdiscipline'. Answer with a number. Do not give a textual explanation.

Q6: Does the article apply quantitative and/or statistical analysis?: 0 = 'no', 1 = 'yes'. Answer with a number. Do not give a textual explanation.

Use the following template: 

Q1 = [];
Q2 = [];
Q3 = [];
Q4 = [];
Q5 = [];
Q6 = [].<|eot_id|><|start_header_id|>assistant<|end_header_id|>Answer:

A Global Meta-analysis of the Immigrant Mortality Advantage
A large body of research on the Healthy Immigrant Effect (or Paradox) has reported an immigrant mortality advantage. However, other studies do not find such significant effects, and some even present contradictory evidence. This article is the first systematic meta-analysis that investigates the immigration-mortality relationship from a global perspective, examining 1,933 all-cause and cardiovascular mortality risk estimates from 103 publications. Our comprehensive analysis allows us to assess interactions between origin and destination regions and to reexamine, on a global scale, some of the most notable explanations for the immigrant mortality advantage, including suggestions that this paradox may be primarily the result of selection effects. We find evidence for the existence of a mild immigrant mortality advantage for working-age individuals. However, the relationship holds only for immigrants who moved between certain world regions, particularly those who immigrated from Northern Africa, Asia, and Southern Europe to richer countries. The results highlight the need in the broader migration literature for an increased focus on selection effects and on outcomes for people who chose not to migrate or who were denied entry into their planned destination country.