MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

WHY IT IS IMPORTANT TO HAVE A KIND DAUGHTER‐IN‐LAW IN JAPAN: LONG‐TERM CARE FOR THE ELDERLY IN JAPAN AND AUSTRALIA

2007· article· en· W2090680095 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Keiko Shimono

Bibliographic record

VenueEconomic Papers A journal of applied economics and policy · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Aging, and Tourism Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)Long-term care insuranceWork (physics)DaughterScarcitySocial insuranceEconomic growthTerm (time)Elderly careLong-term carePolitical scienceBusinessDemographic economicsEconomicsMedicineNursingGeographyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research examines the reasons for delay in the development of a universal public long‐term caring system and public insurance system for the frail and elderly in Japan, up to April 2000. Japan is one of the richest countries in the world but is also a relatively aged society. However, it lags behind other OECD countries in the development and provision of long‐term care services. In Japan, over half of women are not in paid employment and a quarter work in unstable and low‐paid jobs, mostly due to the scarcity of permanent positions for married women and strong social expectations relating to the role of Japanese women. Most Japanese people believe that married women will be the primary carers for both young and old members of the family. As a result of this expectation, the introduction of long‐term care insurance for the frail elderly was delayed until April 2000. Long‐term care insurance has lightened the burden of caring for the frail elderly. However, it still requires women at home to provide primary care.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.663
Threshold uncertainty score0.980

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.283 · 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

Citations2
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEconomic Papers A journal of applied economics and policySame topicMigration, Aging, and Tourism StudiesFrench-language works237,207