MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3209151722 · doi:10.1136/oem-2021-epi.404

S-85 Sex and gender inequalities: segregation of OHS exposures and preventive avenues for a population of low-educated teenagers entering the labour force

2021· article· en· W3209151722 on OpenAlexaffabout
Marie Laberge, Aurélie Tondoux, Myriam Bérubé

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Health and Safety Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkforceOccupational safety and healthPsychosocialPsychologyPopulationMedicineEnvironmental healthGerontologyPolitical sciencePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As men and women hold different jobs, have different social roles and different power influence in societal strata, they are exposed to different physical and psychosocial hazards at work. Adolescents with lower levels of education who start working are particularly vulnerable to sex/gender segregation of tasks and exposure to different work hazards. In Quebec, adolescents who have experienced significant academic delays are referred to the Work-Oriented Training Program (WOTP). In this program, they learn semi-skilled trades by doing practicums, through Co-operative Education. These placements involve many occupational health and safety risks. For example, students may be exposed to various toxic substances in cleaning jobs, to wood or metal dust in processing plants or garages, to allergens in pet care businesses, hair salons, or child care centers. As jobs are segregated by gender, prevention approaches must take this into account. Occupational health and safety (OHS) risk factors may differ by sex and/or gender (e.g. when a small girl uses tools designed for tall men; or when manual handling training only considers ‘boxes’ as potential loads rather than a variety of situations, such as angry children or objects). Accordingly, occupational safety and health programs and prevention strategies should consider sex and gender-related factors. Our team is developing educational tools and resources to help these students improve and maintain their health as they enter the workforce, through an equity perspective. This presentation will discuss the differentiated hazards faced by low-educated male and female adolescents, as well as promising prevention avenues, including specific consideration for ‘invisible risks’ often encountered by young women. The WOTP examples that will be given can be applicable to other contexts of vocational training and work integration in low-skilled jobs for young workers.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.328
Threshold uncertainty score0.652

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.467
Teacher spread0.367 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOccupational Health and Safety Research→French-language works237,207→