MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4282940811 · doi:10.9778/cmajo.20210338

Precarious work among personal support workers in the Greater Toronto Area: a respondent-driven sampling study

2022· article· en· W4282940811 on OpenAlexfundvenueaboutno aff
Andrew D. Pinto, Ayu Pinky Hapsari, Julia Ho, Christopher Meaney, Lisa Avery, Nadha Hassen, Arif Jetha, A. Morgan Lay, Michael Rotondi, Daniyal Zuberi

Bibliographic record

VenueCMAJ Open · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEmployment and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchInstitute of Population and Public HealthUniversity of TorontoPublic Health AgencyMcMaster UniversitySt. Michael's Hospital FoundationGovernment of OntarioPhysicians' Services Incorporated FoundationPublic Health Agency of Canada
KeywordsRespondentWorkforceLogistic regressionMedicineEmpowermentHealth careConfidence intervalDemographySociologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<h3>Background:</h3> The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the role of personal support workers (PSWs) in health care, as well as their work conditions. Our study aimed to understand the characteristics of the PSW workforce, their work conditions and their job security, as well as to explore the health of PSWs and the impact of precarious employment on their health. <h3>Methods:</h3> Our community-based participatory action research focused on PSWs in the Greater Toronto Area. We administered an online, cross-sectional survey between June and December 2020 using respondent-driven sampling. Data on sociodemographics, employment precarity, worker empowerment and health status were collected. We assessed the association between precarious employment and health using multivariable logistic regression models. <h3>Results:</h3> We contacted 739 PSWs, and 664 consented to participate. Overall, 658 (99.1%) completed at least part of the survey. Using data adjusted for our sampling approach, the participants were predominantly Black (76.5%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 68.2%–84.9%), women (90.1%, 95% CI 85.1%–95.1%) and born outside of Canada (97.4%, 95% CI 94.9%–99.9%). Most worked in home care (43.9%, 95% CI 35.2%–52.5%) or long-term care (34.5%, 95% CI 27.4%–42.0%). Although most participants had at least some postsecondary education (unadjusted proportion = 83.4%, <i>n</i> = 529), more than half were considered low income (55.1%, 95% CI 46.3%–63.9%). Most participants were precariously employed (86.5%, 95% CI 80.7%–92.4%) and lacked paid sick days (89.5%, 95% CI 85.8%–93.3%) or extended health benefits (74.1%, 95% CI 66.8%–81.4%). Nearly half of the participants described their health as less than very good (46.7%, 95% CI 37.9%–55.5%). Employment precarity was significantly associated with higher risk of depression (odds ratio 1.02, 95% CI 1.01–1.03). <h3>Interpretation:</h3> Despite being key members of health care teams, most PSWs were precariously employed with low wages that keep them in poverty; the poor work conditions they faced could be detrimental to their physical and mental health. Equitable strategies are needed to provide decent work conditions for PSWs and to improve their health.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.148
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations18
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCMAJ OpenSame topicEmployment and Welfare StudiesFrench-language works237,207