MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2127081054 · doi:10.1177/1757975913514781

Globalization and the rise of precarious employment: the new frontier for workplace health promotion

2014· article· en· W2127081054 on OpenAlexaff
Sam Caldbick, Ronald Labonté, K. S. Mohindra, Arne Rückert

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Health Promotion · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEmployment and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Population and Public HealthUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkplace health promotionRestructuringRecessionPrecarious workGlobalizationFlexibility (engineering)Global healthFinancial crisisHealth promotionGlobal recessionIntervention (counseling)Economic growthDevelopment economicsBusinessHealth careLabour economicsEconomicsMedicineMarket economyFinanceWork (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Global market integration over the past three decades has led to labour market restructuring in most countries around the world. Employment flexibility has been emphasized as a way for employers to restructure their organizations to remain globally competitive. This flexibility has resulted in the growth of precarious employment, which has been exacerbated by the global financial crisis and resulting recession in 2007/2008, and the ongoing economic uncertainty throughout much of the world. Precarious employment may result in short and long-term health consequences for many workers. This presents a deeper and more structural determinant of health than what health promoters have traditionally considered. It calls for a different understanding of workplace health promotion research and intervention that goes beyond enabling healthier lifestyle choices or advocating safer workplace conditions to ensuring adequate social protection floors that provide people with sufficient resources to lead healthy lives, and for advocacy for taxation justice to finance such protection.

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)0.004
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.013
Scholarly communication0.0100.008
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.369 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations54
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Health PromotionSame topicEmployment and Welfare StudiesFrench-language works237,207