Mapping low-wage and precarious employment among lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people in Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development countries: A scoping review protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Low-wage and precarious employment are prevalent and on the rise, disproportionately impacting marginalized populations. Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) populations have been largely left out of economic justice movements and scholarly literature on precarious employment and its deleterious social and health impacts. Methods: This scoping review protocol will guide a theoretical and narrative mapping of the literature on low-wage and precarious employment among LGBTQ+ people to better understand the extent and nature of this phenomenon. We will include empirical literature that discuss dimensions of this phenomenon in Organisation and Economic Co-operation and Development countries published on/after January 1, 2000. PRISMA-ScR guidelines structure this protocol. We will search 10 bibliographic databases to locate literatures across disciplines: EconLit, Sociological Abstracts, Scopus, PsycInfo, Social Work Abstracts, ABI/Inform, Business Source Premier, LGBTQ+ Source, Gender Studies Database, and Web of Science, with support from a Public Health Research Librarian. A rigorous search strategy was developed for PsycInfo (OVID) and will be adapted for subsequent database searches. Titles and abstracts will be independently screened by a subset of co-authors, followed by a full text review. Data abstraction and charting will be conducted using a standardized abstraction tool.
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 | 0.155 | 0.155 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.030 | 0.023 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.035 | 0.008 |
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".