Critical Illness in Migrant Workers in the Windsor-Essex Region: A Descriptive Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite their essential role in Canadian agriculture, migrant workers face numerous healthcare barriers. There is a knowledge gap regarding the healthcare experiences of migrant workers with critical illness in the Windsor-Essex region. Our objective was to collect information on the experiences of migrant workers experiencing a critical illness at Windsor Regional Hospital (WRH) between 31 December 2011 and 31 December 2021. We conducted a retrospective chart review and interviews with migrant workers. We identified 14 migrant workers who presented to WRH with a critical illness over these 10 years. Despite occasional barriers regarding access to care, the migrant workers received an appropriate standard of care in Canada. Five of the fourteen patients identified were repatriated to their home countries. The migrant worker patients interviewed expressed satisfaction with the care they received in Canada but identified repatriation as a specific concern to receiving continuity of care. The health and financial burden imposed by critical illness on migrant workers and their employers makes critically ill workers vulnerable to medical repatriation as a unique social determinant of health. Considering the critical role of migrant workers in Canada's food security, policy changes should be considered to ensure critically ill workers are able to remain until recovery.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".