MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2762504722 · doi:10.1177/1084822317720185

Organizational Considerations for Supporting the Safety of Home Support Workers: Results From a Scoping Review

2017· review· en· W2762504722 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueHome Health Care Management & Practice · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNursingBusinessMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the population ages, and more people are living at home with chronic conditions, there is an increasing need for home support workers (HSWs). Safety is a central concern for HSWs, and contributes to the recruitment and retention of HSWs and ultimately to a sustainable home care sector. This article reports on a scoping review that was conducted to assess the state of the literature related to the safety of HSWs. Studies were selected that address the central phenomenon and that were conducted from 2000 to 2015. One hundred twenty-six studies were included in the synthesis of findings. This article outlines two of the four major findings, those related to safety factors associated with home care organizations: (1) injury prevention initiatives and (2) human resource planning. The findings have important implications for developing strategies to address safety concerns for HSWs.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.516
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.169
GPT teacher head0.519
Teacher spread0.350 · 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