Bibliographic record
Abstract
In response to the growing role of personal support workers (PSWs) in the delivery of health care services to Ontarians, the Ontario government has moved forward with the creation of a PSW registry. This registry will be mandatory for all PSWs employed by publicly funded health care employers, and has the stated objectives of better highlighting the work that PSWs do in Ontario, providing a platform for PSWs and employers to more easily access the labour market, and to provide government with information for human resources planning. In this paper we consider the factors that brought the creation of a PSW registry onto the Ontario government’s policy agenda, discuss how the registry is being implemented, and provide an analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of this policy change. Prenant acte du rôle de plus en plus important joué par les préposés aux services de soutien à la personne (PSSP) dans les soins fournis aux Ontariens, le gouvernement de l’Ontario a décidé de créer un registre des PSSP. L’inscription dans ce registre sera obligatoire pour tout PSSP travaillant pour des employeurs financés sur fonds publics et les objectifs suivants sont poursuivis : mettre en valeur le travail des PSSP en Ontario, fournir un point d’accès au marché du travail pour les PSSP et leurs employeurs, et fournir au gouvernement l’information nécessaire pour planifier les ressources humaines dans ce domaine. Dans cet article, nous décrivons les facteurs expliquant comment la décision politique de créer un registre des PSSP a été prise, nous discutons la façon dont celui-ci est mis en place, et nous proposons une analyse des forces et limites de cette décision politique.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.023 | 0.077 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".