MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3197814790 · doi:10.1037/ocp0000287

The C.A.R.E. model of employee bereavement support.

2021· article· en· W3197814790 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Stephanie Gilbert, Jane Mullen, E. Kevin Kelloway, Jennifer K. Dimoff, Michael Teed, Taegen McPhee

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Occupational Health Psychology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCape Breton University
KeywordsPsychologyGriefPsycINFOThematic analysisSocial psychologyOccupational stressApplied psychologyAccommodationSocial supportWork (physics)Qualitative researchPsychotherapistMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

= 14) who continued to work full-time. Data was analyzed using thematic analysis conducted by three independent coders. The results suggested four key themes that characterized effective bereavement support in the workplace and that together comprise the C.A.R.E. model of bereavement support-vis: (1) communication, (2) accommodation, (3) recognition of the loss, and (4) emotional support. The results provide insight into critical ways that employers, leaders, and coworkers can support grieving employees. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.735
Threshold uncertainty score0.857

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.144
GPT teacher head0.488
Teacher spread0.344 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations36
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Occupational Health PsychologySame topicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207