MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Impact of Labor Policies on the Health of Young Children in the Context of Economic Globalization

2013· review· en· W2105385001 on OpenAlexaff
Jody Heymann, Alison Earle, Kristen McNeill

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Public Health · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicChild and Adolescent Health
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)BreastfeedingGlobalizationHealth careWork (physics)Parental leaveEarly childhoodMedicinePsychologyNursingEconomic growthDevelopmental psychologyPolitical sciencePediatricsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Globalization has transformed the workplace at the same time that increasing numbers of children live in families in which all adults work for pay outside the home. Extensive research evidence demonstrates the importance of parental involvement in the early years of a child's life. Yet, parents caring for young children may face challenges in fulfilling both work and family responsibilities under current labor force conditions. In this article, we review the evidence on the importance of parental care for meeting young children's routine care needs, preventive health care needs, and curative medical treatment requirements. We examine the evidence regarding the impact of four policies in particular on young children's health and development: parental leave, breastfeeding breaks, early childhood care and education, and leave for children's health needs. Last, we examine the availability of these policies worldwide and discuss the potential economic implications.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.495
Teacher spread0.392 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations30
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnual Review of Public HealthSame topicChild and Adolescent HealthFrench-language works237,207