MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2071537678 · doi:10.1002/casp.857

The health of employed women and men: work, family, and community correlates

2006· article· en· W2071537678 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

VenueJournal of Community & Applied Social Psychology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanSaskatchewan Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpousePsychologyCommunity healthAssociation (psychology)GerontologyQuality (philosophy)Social psychologyPublic healthMedicineSociologyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Research into clarifying the relationship between social roles and health has increasingly focused on studying the particular circumstances in which occupying multiple roles may enhance or diminish well‐being. This study examined the association between a general measure of well‐being—self‐rated health—and the perceived quality of work, family and community in a sample of employed urban‐dwelling Canadians in a mid‐size city, and whether the nature of the association differed for men and women. Few gender differences were found in the perceived quality of work, family and community. However, men and women differed significantly in the specific type of quality measures associated with general health. For women, satisfaction with one's partner/spouse and in the money available to meet basic family needs had a stronger association with self‐rated health. For men, the significant correlates were satisfaction with family relationships (other than one's partner) and the community physical environment. For both women and men, a more socially cohesive community was associated with better self‐rated health. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.585
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.339 · 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