The Inequitable Burden of the COVID-19 Pandemic Among Marginalized Older Workers in the United States: An Intersectional Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic has profoundly affected the lives of people globally, widening long-standing inequities. We examined the COVID-19 pandemic's impact on employment conditions by race/ethnicity, gender, and educational attainment and the association between such conditions and well-being in older adults in the United States. METHODS: Using data from the Health and Retirement Study respondents interviewed between May 2020 and May 2021 when they were ≥55 years of age, we examined intersectional patterns in COVID-19-related changes in employment conditions among 4,107 participants working for pay at the start of the pandemic. We also examined the compounding nature of changes in employment conditions and their association with financial hardship, food insecurity, and poor self-rated health. RESULTS: Relative to non-Hispanic White men with greater than high school education (>HS), Black and Latinx men and women were more likely to experience job loss irrespective of education; among those who did not experience job loss, men with ≤HS reporting Black, Latinx, or "other" race were >90% less likely to transition to remote work. Participants who experienced job loss with decreased income or continued in-person employment with decreased income/shift changes had greater prevalence of financial hardship, food insecurity, and poor/fair self-rated health than others. DISCUSSION: The impact of COVID-19 on employment conditions is inequitably patterned and is associated with financial hardship, food insecurity, and adverse health in older adults. Policies to improve employment quality and expand social insurance programs among this group are needed to reduce growing inequities in well-being later in life.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".