MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285406532 · doi:10.12927/hcpol.2022.26852

Forecasting Staffing Needs for Ontario’s Long-Term Care Sector

2022· article· en· W4285406532 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Adrian Rohit Dass, Raisa Deber, Audrey Laporte

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare policy · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Care Issues
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Health Information
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStaffingTerm (time)Long-term careBusinessOperations managementEconomicsNursingManagementMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a forecasting model for personal support workers (PSWs) and nurses (registered nurses [RNs] and registered practical nurses [RPNs]) for Ontario's long-term care (LTC) sector. In the base-case scenario, the model projects a shortfall in the supply of full-time equivalent (FTE) workers required to meet the expected demand for care for all workers by 2035, which would require an estimated increase of 11,632 FTE PSWs, 6,031 FTE RNs and 10,178 FTE RPNs entering the market by 2035. The results of this paper may have important implications for health human resources policy planning in Ontario's LTC sector.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.538
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.153
GPT teacher head0.467
Teacher spread0.314 · 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

Citations17
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare policySame topicGlobal Health Care IssuesFrench-language works237,207