MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2188353070

WELFARE PROGRAMS AND REFORMS IN CANADA: REDUCING OR REPRODUCING HEALTH INEQUALITIES?

2012· article· en· W2188353070 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Josian Petgrave

Bibliographic record

VenueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada) · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFood Security and Health in Diverse Populations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInequalityWelfarePolitical sciencePublic economicsEconomic growthEconomicsMathematicsLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effect of welfare policies is evident in the behaviours of welfare recipients and in their patterns of health. Yet there are very few studies with up to date analyses on the health consequences of the mid-1990s welfare reform in Canada. This study examines the effects of welfare income and welfare reforms on health outcomes of welfare recipients. I use National Population Health Survey (NPHS) in 1996 to present a baseline health differences by welfare status. I later utilize the mid-1900s welfare reform in a natural experiment setting to examine the health outcomes of welfare poor and working poor respondents. By using provincial welfare reform intensities, I detect exogenous variation that can indicate the effect of a greater reduction in welfare funding on health outcomes. Overall, my results show a strong correlation between welfare income and health outcomes, but policy makers must be cautious when interpreting causality.

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)0.014
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 score0.095
Threshold uncertainty score0.690

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.006
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.002
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada)→Same topicFood Security and Health in Diverse Populations→French-language works237,207→