MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Working Wounded

2014· other· en· W1561409332 on OpenAlexaff
Lori Francis, James E. Cameron, E. Kevin Kelloway, Victor M. Catano, Arla L. Day, C. Gail Hepburn

Bibliographic record

VenueWell Being · 2014
Typeother
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Health and Safety Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of LethbridgeSaint Mary's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStigma (botany)Situational ethicsAffect (linguistics)PsychologyVulnerability (computing)Social psychologyCompensation (psychology)Isolation (microbiology)Intervention (counseling)Work (physics)Workers' compensationPsychiatryComputer securityEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stigma contributes to a number of negative consequences for members of devalued groups. Injured employees report being labeled as malingerers or abusers of the health‐care, compensation, and legal systems and experience discrimination and isolation at work. Drawing from research in multiple disciplines on return to work and stigma, we discuss why workers returning to work following physical injuries may be stigmatized in this fashion and outline the significant costs associated with such stigmatization. Considering societal, organizational, situational, and individual influences, we address factors that we believe differentiate injured workers, their injuries, and their workplaces and suggest ways that these factors, alone and together, affect injured workers' vulnerability to stigma. From there, we consider how the stress‐provoking and painful process of stigmatization of those returning to work following an injury can be alleviated by appropriate organizational intervention.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.013

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.382 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWell BeingSame topicOccupational Health and Safety ResearchFrench-language works237,207