MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2022396005 · doi:10.12927/whp.2008.19930

Work Status and Health of Women: A Comparative Study of Northern and Southern States of Rural India

2008· article· en· W2022396005 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sharmishtha Basu, Shiv Narayan Sidh

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld health & population · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEmployment and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWork (physics)GeographySocioeconomicsEnvironmental healthMedicineSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper examines the net effect of work status on women's health and whether the effect persists after controlling for the influence of socio-economic factors. Our hypothesis is that working women face a greater risk of morbidity and mortality, given that most would be expected to shoulder dual responsibilities: market and household. The paper also examines whether the risk varies across regions. In particular, we examine whether the work status-health relationship differs between the southern and northern regions of India, which are known to be distinct in female autonomy. While women in India face many serious health concerns, this analysis focuses on only two issues: nutritional status (as measured by body mass index and prevalence of anemia) and reproductive health (as assessed by the presence of reproductive health problems) of women from villages in the study area. Results show that though both work status and socio-economic factors influence health status, the latter are more important; most of the gross effect of work status is due to socio-economic conditions rather than work participation. This calls for policy intervention in providing better health facilities, female education and supplementary nutrition programs for poor women.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.201
Threshold uncertainty score0.973

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.334 · 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

Citations10
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld health & populationSame topicEmployment and Welfare StudiesFrench-language works237,207