MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4288766901 · doi:10.1002/9781119887638.ch20

Ethical Aspects of Occupational Health

2022· other· en· W4288766901 on OpenAlexaff
Professor Kerry Gardiner, P. Rees, Professor Anil Adisesh, Professor David Zalk, Professor Malcolm Harrington, Dr Roxane Gervais, Professor Joan Saary

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEthics in medical practice
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConfidentialityEquity (law)Public relationsEngineering ethicsHealth professionalsEthical codeOccupational safety and healthBusinessPolitical sciencePsychologyLawHealth careEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rather than focusing on legal issues, which vary between jurisdictions, the chapter considers ethical issues, the ones that challenge us all in our everyday practice. On the basis of the principle of equity, occupational health professionals should assist workers in obtaining and maintaining employment not withstanding health status or any ‘lack of ability’. As there is a wide range of duties, obligations and responsibilities as well as complex relationships among those concerned and involved in occupational safety and health matters it calls for a clear view about the ethics of occupational health professionals and standards in their professional conduct. Special attention should be given to ethical dilemmas which may arise from pursuing simultaneously objectives which may be competing such as the protection of employment and the protection of health, the right to information and confidentiality, and the conflicts between individual and collective interests.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.109

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0110.035
Scholarly communication0.0120.005
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0130.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.218
GPT teacher head0.604
Teacher spread0.386 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEthics in medical practice→French-language works237,207→