MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384944199 · doi:10.56238/homeebookorg02-011

Ergonomía en el trabajo - bienestar de los trabajadores

2023· book-chapter· es· W4384944199 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSeven Editora eBooks · 2023
Typebook-chapter
Languagees
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Health and Safety in Workplaces
Canadian institutionsImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

El objetivo era identificar las consecuencias de la ergonomía en la salud de los trabajadores. Este estudio cualitativo buscó, a través de la revisión de la literatura, hacer un debate teórico entre varios autores sobre los siguientes temas: Ergonomía del trabajo, Legislación que describe los derechos y deberes de los trabajadores, Accidentes y enfermedades profesionales en el trabajo, además de presentar sugerencias para medidas educativas y modelos de éxito empresarial. Como resultado, se demostró que al promover propuestas de mejoras que se centran en la salud y el bienestar en el trabajo, el trabajador se siente valorado y cuidado, generando como consecuencia, el aumento de su felicidad, un mayor compromiso y mejora en la producción de sus tareas, además del reconocimiento y elevación de su profesión y su lugar de trabajo. Se concluye que una empresa que trabaja siguiendo bases sólidas de ergonomía en el trabajo está lista para obtener ventajas significativas, impactando en sus resultados y su competitividad en el mercado.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.505
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0040.004
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.359 · 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