MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3155683391 · doi:10.32920/ihtp.v1i1.1418

Organizational culture, diversity, and employees’ health in social/human services: A systematic review

2021· review· en· W3155683391 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Bharati Sethi, Rosemary Vito, Vanessa Ongbanouekeni

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Health Trends and Perspectives · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicWorkplace Health and Well-being
Canadian institutionsThe King's UniversityWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrganizational cultureDiversity (politics)Job satisfactionWorkforceDemographicsEmployee researchPublic relationsOrganizational commitmentHuman servicesOrganisation climateOrganizational behavior and human resourcesBusinessPsychologySociologyPolitical scienceSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AbstractLeadership and organizational culture significantly impact employees' work performance and job satisfaction, but less is known about employee health and well-being within a diverse work environment. This study systematically reviewed 23 studies published between 2007-2019 that addressed organizational culture, diversity/workplace, and employee health within North American social/human services organizations. Results highlighted three themes: 1) Organizational Culture within Social/Human Services, 2) Diversity and Workplace, and 3) Employee Health at the Intersection of Organizational Culture and Diversity. Conclusions emphasize the need for organizations to adjust to changing workforce demographics and promote an equitable workplace culture.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.004
Bibliometrics0.0100.013
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.468
Teacher spread0.381 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Health Trends and PerspectivesSame topicWorkplace Health and Well-beingFrench-language works237,207