MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3171168171 · doi:10.1177/08404704211021109

Evaluating the mental health and well-being of Canadian healthcare workers during the COVID-19 outbreak

2021· article· en· W3171168171 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare Management Forum · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCOVID-19 and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthPandemicHealth careCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PopulationPublic healthMedicinePsychological interventionDistressMental healthcareNursingPsychologyEnvironmental healthPsychiatryPolitical scienceClinical psychologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare systems have been under extreme levels of stress due to increases in patient distress and patient deaths. While additional research and public health funding initiatives can alleviate these systemic issues, it is also important to consider the ongoing mental health and well-being of professionals working in healthcare. By surveying healthcare workers working in Canada during the COVID-19 pandemic, we found that there was an elevated level of depressive symptomatology in that population. We also found that when employees were provided with accurate and timely information about the pandemic, and additional protective measures in the workplace, they were less likely to report negative effects on well-being. We recommend that healthcare employers take these steps, as well as providing targeted mental health interventions, in order to maintain the mental health of their employees, which in turn will provide better healthcare at the population 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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.668
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.430
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