MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Promoting Health in the Construction Industry?

2002· article· en· W2046644021 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Catherine Pritchard, Ann Marie McCarthy

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Health and Safety Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersTrent University
KeywordsOccupational safety and healthLegislationBusinessHealth promotionEnvironmental healthConstruction industryHealth sectorPromotion (chess)Occupational health nursingPublic healthMedicineHealth servicesNursingEngineeringPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The construction industry has long been regarded as a high-risk industry in relation to health and safety issues. The purpose of this research was to investigate the extent of occupational health and safety provision within the residential development sector of the construction industry in Britain. An additional aim was to gauge the sectors' attitudes toward health promotion. Data were collected using a self-completed questionnaire that was sent to 200 residential developers; a 46% response rate was achieved. The results revealed a high level of knowledge of health and safety legislation; occupational health provision in the sector is low, but a strong appreciation was demonstrated of the value of such services. There was a low level of health promotion policy development in relation to the areas of alcohol, smoking, and skin cancer.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.446
Teacher spread0.321 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations11
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Occupational and Environmental MedicineSame topicOccupational Health and Safety ResearchFrench-language works237,207