A COMMUNITY SURVEY OF CHILD CARE ISSUES IN CANADIAN SHIFT WORKERS: EVIDENCE FOR BARRIERS AND OPPORTUNITIES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Child care availability and affordability are common concerns throughout many communities in Canada. Furthermore, there are specific child care issues affecting families that include shift workers. A formal initiative was developed in the Elk Valley, British Columbia, following identification of child care as a major concern of residents, and in 2015 a survey was conducted with the aim of understanding child care issues as they relate to employment. The intent was to investigate barriers and opportunities, and to develop both short- and long-term mitigation strategies. The survey queried the perspectives of 302 respondents, including parents, guardians, and other caregivers, as well as child care providers, employers, and other interested community members. The results confirmed that there are barriers to availability and affordability of child care and allowed for recommendations regarding mitigation strategies. Furthermore, respondents indicated that municipal governments, the provincial government, local employers, child care providers, families, and other community organizations are responsible for working together to develop solutions to the child care issues. The results of this community-based survey are applicable to other communities across Canada and internationally, and provide insight into child care issues that impact the workforce.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".