MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2269265236

Work-related suicide: A review of the judicial approaches in United States, Australia, Canada and United Kingdom

2010· review· en· W2269265236 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Robert Guthrie, Muhammad Zulfa

Bibliographic record

VenueeSpace (Curtin University) · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicElder Abuse and Neglect
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNexus (standard)Compensation (psychology)Workers' compensationStatuteWork (physics)Context (archaeology)Political scienceSuicide preventionOccupational safety and healthPoison controlLawMedicinePsychologyMedical emergencyEngineeringSocial psychologyHistory
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Work-related death by suicide raises a number of difficult issues in the context of workers' compensation. Workers' compensation statutes usually prevent recovery of compensation where an injury is self-inflicted. Additionally compensation is usually denied where the nexus between employment and injury is broken. Both these matters are considerations in cases where work-cause injury results in a worker taking their own life. This paper examines the different approaches to the issue of work suicide in four major English common law jurisdictions. This survey concludes that all jurisdictions have gradually moved away from an approach, which restricted compensation for suicide to a more contemporary approach, which has removed most of the barriers for compensation for suicide.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.713
Threshold uncertainty score0.571

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0090.016
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.115
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations3
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeSpace (Curtin University)Same topicElder Abuse and NeglectFrench-language works237,207