Voices from Service Providers Who Supported Young Caregivers throughout the COVID-19 Pandemic in the Canadian Context
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This empirical research is part of a larger project beginning in 2020 and ongoing until 2023 exploring the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on young caregivers aged 5-25 years and their families in Canada. Utilizing the social determinants of health as a conceptual framework, this case study emphasizes the voices of professionals offering services to young caregiver clients during the pandemic, and explores their perspectives on the impact of the pandemic on young caregivers and their families. Across three (3) different organizations offering programs and services to young caregiver clients in Ontario, six (6) individual interviews were conducted with directors/program managers and four (4) group interviews were conducted with thirteen (13) staff members who worked directly with young caregivers and their families. Nineteen (19) service providers participated in total. The results of this study highlight five (5) primary themes that emerged through data analysis: i) the role of service providers, ii) the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on organizations and service providers supporting young caregivers and their families, iii) barriers for service users, iv) helpful resources for service providers and organizations, and v) resources needed/preferred by service providers and organization. The pandemic significantly impacted young caregivers and their families, as reported by professionals, and organizations working with young caregivers and their families were tasked with addressing increased service demands and adapting service delivery to follow public health guidelines.
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 | 0.006 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.024 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".