MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293242206 · doi:10.47339/ephj.2021.181

An analysis of the relationship between WHMIS certification and holder's knowledge after being certified

2021· article· en· W4293242206 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Min Liao, Environmental Health BCIT School of Health Sciences, Heacock Helen

Bibliographic record

VenueBCIT Environmental Public Health Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Health and Safety Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCertificationCertificateHazardBusinessLegislationWork (physics)Occupational safety and healthPublic relationsSession (web analytics)Hazardous wasteMedical educationEngineeringPolitical scienceMedicineLawComputer scienceAdvertising

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Workplace Hazardous Materials Information System (WHMIS) is the Canadian standard for hazard communication. This system consists of hazard classification, cautionary labelling of containers, safety data sheets, as well as worker education and training programs. In British Columbia, WorkSafeBC is the legal authority for occupational health and safety. Employers must provide worker education and training while workers must participate in these learning opportunities as required. Despite these requirements, there is currently no legislation that mandates WHMIS certificate holders to recertify after a period of time. Holders may work decades for the same organization and receive their one and only training session in their careers when they started working. There is a likelihood that information vital to occupational health and safety is gradually forgotten. This research study examined WHMIS knowledge retention of holders upon being certified.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.210
GPT teacher head0.459
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBCIT Environmental Public Health JournalSame topicOccupational Health and Safety ResearchFrench-language works237,207