MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Caring for our caregivers in a pandemic: challenges, gaps and suggestions for change

2022· article· en· W4283779700 on OpenAlexaffabout
Julia Marie Hajjar, Dina Idriss-Wheeler, Samantha A. Oostlander

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Care and Caring · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPandemicPsychosocialPublic healthCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Health careQuality of life (healthcare)PsychologyGerontologyNursingBusinessMedicinePolitical scienceEconomic growthDiseasePsychiatryEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unpaid caregivers provide valuable care that saves the Canadian healthcare system billions of dollars every year. Caregiving is highly taxing, often resulting in psychosocial impacts that are associated with negative health outcomes and decreased quality of life for caregivers. These impacts are exacerbated when public health disasters occur, such as pandemics. This article employs a socioecological approach to explore how existing risk factors at the micro, meso and macro levels negatively impacted caregivers in Canada during the COVID-19 pandemic. We use these findings to suggest policy recommendations and advocate for better support for caregivers in the event of future pandemics or other disasters.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.518
Threshold uncertainty score0.312

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.315 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Care and CaringSame topicGeriatric Care and Nursing HomesFrench-language works237,207