MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3199203280 · doi:10.1111/ilr.12332

Impacts of the COVID‐19 pandemic and unpaid care work on informal workers' livelihoods

2021· article· en· W3199203280 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ana Carolina Ogando, Michael Rogan, Rachel Moussié

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Labour Review · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEmployment and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsLivelihoodRecessionInformal sectorWork (physics)PandemicGeneral partnershipEconomic growthCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Unpaid workCare workPrecarious workEconomicsBusinessLabour economicsAgricultureGeographyFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The COVID-19 pandemic triggered a health, economic and care crisis affecting all workers, including those in the informal economy. This article uses data from the first round of a mixed-methods longitudinal study conducted in June/July 2020 by Women in Informal Employment: Globalizing and Organizing in partnership with informal workers' organizations in 12 cities. It assesses the impacts of the multidimensional crisis on care responsibilities and the resulting effects on livelihoods and food security. A gendered analysis of paid work and unpaid care work sheds light on the unique features of the impacts of the current "pandemic recession" on the world's informal labour force.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.364 · 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

Citations39
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Labour ReviewSame topicEmployment and Welfare StudiesFrench-language works237,207