MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1974003155 · doi:10.1136/jech.56.7.506

Effect of de-industrialisation on working conditions and self reported health in a sample of manufacturing workers

2002· article· en· W1974003155 on OpenAlexaffabout
A. Ostry

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Epidemiology & Community Health · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOccupational exposure and asthma
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndustrialisationMedicineLogistic regressionConfoundingSample (material)RestructuringEnvironmental healthBusinessEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To explore the impact of de-industrialisation over a 20 year period on working conditions and health among sawmill workers, in the province of British Columbia (BC), Canada. DESIGN AND SETTING: This investigation is based on a sample of 3000 sawmill workers employed in 1979 (a year before the beginning de-industrialisation) and interviewed in 1998. The sample was obtained by random selection from an already gathered cohort of approximately 28 000 BC sawmill workers. Change in working conditions from 1979 to 1998 are described. Self reported health status, in 1998, was used as a dependent variable in logistic regression after controlling for confounders. MAIN RESULTS: Downsizing in BC sawmills eliminated 60% of workers between 1979 and 1998. Working conditions in 1998 were better for those who left the sawmill industry and obtained re-employment elsewhere. Workers who remained employed in restructuring sawmills were approximately 50% more likely to report poor health than those re-employed elsewhere. CONCLUSIONS: Working conditions and health status were better for workers who, under pressure of de-industrialisation, left the sawmill industry and obtained re-employment outside this sector.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.722

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.148
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.277 · 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations28
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Epidemiology & Community HealthSame topicOccupational exposure and asthmaFrench-language works237,207