Self-Employed Canadians’ Experiences with Cancer and Work: A Qualitative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Self-employed individuals with cancer face unique challenges that have not been fully explored in previous research. For example, while some studies conducted in Europe have suggested that self-employed workers with cancer experience more adverse health and work-related outcomes compared to salaried workers, the specific manners in which cancer affects the health, work, and businesses of self-employed individuals remain inadequately understood. This lack of understanding represents a crucial gap in the literature, as self-employed individuals make up a significant portion of the workforce in many countries, including Canada. To address this gap, a qualitative interpretive description study was undertaken to explore the experiences of 23 self-employed Canadians diagnosed with cancer from six provinces, with the aim of generating insights into the unique challenges faced by this population. The interviews were conducted in the language chosen by the participants from the two official languages of Canada, namely English and French. Using reflexive thematic analysis, four major themes and twelve subthemes were generated from the participants' shared accounts that reflected the impact of cancer on self-employed Canadians' physical, cognitive, and psychological function, affecting their work ability and their ability to maintain their business and financial well-being. Participants in the study also shared strategies they used to continue working and maintain their business during their cancer experience. This study sheds light on the impact of cancer on self-employed individuals and provides insight into the experiences of self-employed individuals with cancer that can inform the development of interventions to support this population.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".