MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3198643791 · doi:10.1002/ajim.23289

Appraisal of Washington State workers' compensation‐based return‐to‐work programs and suggested system improvements: A survey of workers with permanent impairments

2021· article· en· W3198643791 on OpenAlexaff
Jeanne M. Sears, Amy T. Edmonds, Ellen MacEachen, Deborah Fulton‐Kehoe

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Industrial Medicine · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooInstitute for Work & Health
FundersNational Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
KeywordsRehabilitationVocational educationMedicineRetrainingWorkers' compensationWork (physics)Vocational rehabilitationOccupational rehabilitationCompensation (psychology)Medical educationApplied psychologyNursingPhysical therapyPsychologyEngineeringBusinessSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Following a work-related permanent impairment, injured workers commonly face barriers to safe and successful return to work (RTW). Examining workers' experiences with the workers' compensation (WC) system could highlight opportunities to improve RTW outcomes. Objectives included summarizing workers': (1) appraisal of several WC-based RTW programs, and (2) suggestions for vocational rehabilitation and WC system improvements to promote safe and sustained RTW. METHODS: In telephone interviews, 582 Washington State workers with work-related permanent impairments were asked whether participation in specified WC-based RTW programs helped them RTW and/or stay at work. Suggestions for program and system improvements were solicited using open-ended questions; qualitative content analysis methods were used to inductively code responses. RESULTS: Most respondents reported positive impacts from RTW program participation; for example, 62.5% of vocational rehabilitation participants reported it helped them RTW, and 51.7% reported it helped them stay at work. Among 582 respondents, 28.0% reported that no change was needed to the WC system, while 57.6% provided suggestions or critiques. Reduce delays/simplify process/improve efficiency was the most frequent WC system theme-mentioned by 34.9%. Among 120 vocational rehabilitation participants, 35.8% reported that no change was needed to vocational rehabilitation, while 46.7% (N = 56) provided suggestions or critiques. More worker choice/input into the vocational retraining plan was the most frequent vocational rehabilitation theme-mentioned by 33.9%. CONCLUSIONS: This study's findings suggest that there is substantial room for improvement in workers' experience with the WC system. In addition, injured workers' feedback may reflect opportunities to reduce administrative burden and to improve worker health and RTW outcomes.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Industrial MedicineSame topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationFrench-language works237,207