MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4324138222 · doi:10.1136/oem-2023-epicoh.244

P-333 Health related economic burden among unorganized sector workers: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2023· review· en· W4324138222 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAbstracts · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealthcare Systems and Reforms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCasualPopulationMeta-analysisMedicineBusinessHealth careEnvironmental healthEconomicsEconomic growthPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<h3>Introduction</h3> Unorganized sector constitutes around 87% working population in India (Periodic Labor Force Survey, 2017 – 18) and 60% working population around the world (ILO Report 2018). Aim of the current study is to find the proportion of the income spent on Health among unorganized sector workers around the world. <h3>Materials and Methods</h3> A systematic search was conducted for published studies in English till December 2022. Independent two electroic searches were carried out in PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science using key words ‘economic burden/financial burden/monetary/cost of illness/Health care cost’ AND ‘unorganized sector/informal sector/blue-collar job/agricultural laborer/construction workers/migrant workers/leather workers/artisans/beedi workers/fishermen/barbers/newspaper vendors/vegetable vendors/fruit vendors/casual laborer/mill workers.’ We have included articles reporting total income of the worker, health related cost. References of the selected articles were also traced. Meta-analysis was performed to calculate pooled estimate using random effects model. Quality of studies was assessed using Newcastle Ottawa Scale adapted for cross-sectional studies. <h3>Results</h3> We have got 321 records from all searched data bases. Of which, 16 records were included for full text review after screening abstract and removing duplicates. Finally, five records were included for meta-analysis. All the variables were first converted from the local currency to USD of that particular year and then to USD of 2022 after adjusting for inflation. Proportion of income was spent on Health was 15.9% (95% CI: 10.9 – 21.7) of the total income earned among the workers belonging to unorganized sector. Significant amount of heterogeneity (I2 = 92.34%) existed among studies. <h3>Conclusion</h3> A significant proportion of total income of unorganized sector workers is being utilized for Health. There is thus an urgent need for devising means of publicly funded healthcare services for the unorganized sector workers.

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.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.709
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0200.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.005

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 head0.175
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.161 · 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