S-469 An Integrated Database of Occupational Information From O*NET-SOC and the Canadian Career Handbook
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Information about occupations and job attributes is available in siloed databases. The lack of integrated data precludes ad-hoc querying and research investigating occupational determinants of health e.g. COVID-19 or stress. Core to integration of occupation data is taxonomic representation of job categories. In North America the official occupational taxonomies are the Canadian National Occupational Classification (NOC) and the United States Standard Occupational Classification (SOC). Objectives This study aimed to integrate job attribute data from the Canadian Career Handbook (CH) and O*NET database to facilitate cross-classification query capabilities and to prototype the creation of metrics for comparing occupations based on job attributes. Methods The integrated database was completed hierarchical structures of both occupational taxonomies were represented; job attributes were selected from the CH and O*NET-SOC; the database was populated with occupational descriptions; occupational codes from the CH and O*NET-SOC were linked using the Brookfield Institute NOC to O*NET-SOC crosswalk. Results The database consists of 1679 rows with unique occupations and 181 columns with occupational attributes. Rows contain a unique combination of hierarchical structures from the CH and O*NET-SOC. Rows also contain detailed occupational descriptions from CH and O*NET-SOC. We queried the integrated data checking O*NET-SOC to CH equivalence and cross-taxonomy selection of job attributes, e.g. Retrieve all or selected attributes for an occupation by CH code or equivalent code in O*NET-SOC. We ran queries for targeted scenarios to retrieve occupations: i) where work is done in physical proximity to others, ii) where incumbents are exposed to disease or infections, iii) at risk of back pain due to physical work factors, iv) where incumbents experience high work-related stressors. Conclusion We report a database combining selected information from the CH and O*NET-SOC that facilitates complex occupational health queries. Further we investigated work-related stressors on low back pain risk by occupation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.017 | 0.025 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.091 | 0.036 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".