The Effects of Teleworking in a Pandemic Context on the Well-Being of People with Disabilities: A Canadian Qualitative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The COVID-19 pandemic has led to numerous changes in work environments. Thousands of workers quickly found themselves having to telework without being prepared, which had consequences on their well-being. Authors proposed telework practices that promote the well-being of workers in a pandemic context, but less attention has been paid to consider the needs of disabled workers. Purpose . This study aimed to explore the effects of telework during the pandemic on the well-being of people with disabilities. Methods . Following an interpretive descriptive research design, interviews were conducted with 16 workers with disabilities (i.e., motor, or sensory). The data were analyzed using a thematic analysis strategy. Results . The results revealed 15 factors that influence the well-being of teleworkers with disabilities. These factors are related to interactions between three spheres of the worker's life: the individual, the organization, and the environment. Ten recommendations are proposed to consider the reality of disabled individuals in the telework practices. Conclusion . Given that telework has expanded since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and will likely continue to remain a widespread modality of work delivery, it becomes even more important to expand knowledge about it, to benefit the well-being of disabled teleworkers.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".