MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1689683418 · doi:10.3233/wor-2008-00695

Left behind in the return-to-work journey: Consumer insights for policy change and practice strategies

2008· article· en· W1689683418 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueWork · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicWorkplace Health and Well-being
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrounded theoryWork (physics)Function (biology)Service delivery frameworkPublic relationsProcess (computing)PsychologyBusinessService (business)MarketingMedicineNursingQualitative researchSociologyPolitical scienceEngineeringComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined system barriers that precluded injured workers from accessing services and supports in the return-to-work (RTW) process. A grounded theory approach was used to investigate injured worker experiences. Methods included in-depth telephone interviews and the constant comparative method to analyze the data. Findings revealed that consumers experienced tensions or a tug-of-war between the RTW system, the health care system, and in accessing and using knowledge. Over time consumers reflected upon these tensions and initiated strategies to enhance return to function and RTW. Insights from consumer-driven strategies that might inform future policy change and promote positive service delivery for injured workers are examined.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.649
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.136
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.301 · 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