MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1521084904 · doi:10.1080/00981389.2013.764379

Making the Invisible Visible: Are Health Social Workers Addressing the Social Determinants of Health?

2013· article· en· W1521084904 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial Work in Health Care · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFood Security and Health in Diverse Populations
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial workSocial determinants of healthSocial exclusionSocial securityHealth careSocial deprivationRacismHealth equityGerontologySociologyMedicineNursingPsychologyPublic healthEconomic growthPolitical scienceGender studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study explored the ways in which health social workers (HSW) address the social determinants of health (SDH) within their social work practice. Social workers (n = 54) employed at major hospitals across Toronto had many years of practice in health care (M = 11 years; SD = 10.32) and indicated that SDH were a top priority in their daily work; with 98% intentionally intervening with at least one and 91% attending to three or more. Health care services were most often addressed (92%), followed by housing (72%), disability (79%), income (72%), and employment security (70%). Few HSW were tackling racism, Aboriginal status, gender, or social exclusion in their daily practice.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.605
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0250.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.365
GPT teacher head0.536
Teacher spread0.171 · 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