Experiences of Environmental Public Health Professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic response in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Environmental Public Health Professionals (EPHPs) have been playing a significant role in the COVID-19 pandemic response. This study examines the lived experiences of EPHPs during the COVID-19 pandemic and explores short- and long long-term strategies to address the challenges of EPHPs. A mixed-method, cross-sectional online survey was conducted in May 2020. The participants were the Canadian Institute of Public Health Inspectors certified EPHPs who currently work in Canada during the pandemic. The study results reveal that EPHPs have been heavily involved in the COVID-19 pandemic response by assuming different roles and tasks in many cases. The study highlights the vast array of EPHPs functions such as education and enforcement. Lack of employer support for training and access to safety equipment are among the significant outcomes. Mechanisms should be developed to ensure that mental health support is accessible for EPHPs to overcome the pandemic work’s challenges. As this is the first study to examine the lived experiences of EPHPs during the COVID-19 pandemic, further in-depth qualitative research should be conducted to examine the experiences of EPHPs at the local level.
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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".