MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2772600426 · doi:10.12927/hcpol.2017.25324

Personal Support Workers in Canada: The New Precariat?

2017· article· fr· W2772600426 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Katherine Zagrodney, Mike Saks

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare policy · 2017
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEmployment and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Health Services and Policy ResearchUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsPosition (finance)Empirical researchHealth careLabour economicsEconomic growthPolitical scienceBusinessSociologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There has been much recent discussion internationally about the emergence in modern society of a new class of workers - the precariat - with a common consciousness based on features such as low wages, insecurity, short-term jobs, minority status and restricted rights. This paper critically explores the extent to which the growing, large-scale group of personal support workers (PSWs) can be viewed as part of a new precariat in terms of their position in the healthcare labour market. Drawing on currently available empirical data, this issue is examined particularly with reference to PSWs in Canada - drawing out some of the implications for government health policy in this sphere.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.077
Threshold uncertainty score0.555

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0170.008
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.339 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations42
Published2017
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare policySame topicEmployment and Welfare StudiesFrench-language works237,207