Self-Employed Canadians’ Experiences with Cancer and Work: A Qualitative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Self-employed individuals comprise around 15% of Canada’s workforce. For those with cancer, frequent functional loss and diminished work ability due to side effects of the disease and its treatment significantly impact their well-being and business vitality. Compared to salaried can-cer survivors, the self-employed experience greater reductions in work hours and up to 48% greater income loss, yet most research addresses the former population. To describe self-employed Canadian cancer survivors’ experiences continuing and returning to work, our quali-tative study examines their strategic efforts to continue working throughout the disease trajecto-ry or return to work post-recovery. Employing an interpretive description approach and an in-terview guide based on a vocational rehabilitation model for cancer survivors, we analyze data from 23 participants—both French- and English-speaking—from six Canadian provinces, with eight different job types and nine different cancer diagnoses. Our constant comparative analysis of the transcribed interviews reveals four major themes and twelve sub-themes: Impact of can-cer on the self-employed function (physical, cognitive, and psychological), on their ability to maintain their business, and financial well-being, and facilitating factors for working with can-cer. Cancer disclosure and non-disclosure were both deemed viable strategies, but ceasing work was not. We thus recommend professional support for self-employed cancer survivors in plan-ning any necessary business modifications to accommodate their condition and cancer treatment to lessen the negative impact of cancer on self and on their business well-being.
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 | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.033 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".