MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390393621 · doi:10.1080/22423982.2023.2298015

A comparative study of governmental financial support and resilience of self-employed people in Sweden and Canada during the COVID-19 pandemic

2023· article· en· W4390393621 on OpenAlexaffabout
Josefine Hansson, Ellen MacEachen, Bodil J. Landstad, Stig Vinberg, Åsa Tjulin

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Circumpolar Health · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEmployment and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersAFA Försäkring
KeywordsPandemicPsychological resilienceCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Resilience (materials science)Self relianceBusinessFinancial crisisPsychologyPolitical scienceEconomic growthEconomicsMedicineSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Globally, self-employed people were among the hardest hit by the repercussions of the COVID-19 pandemic and faced hardships such as financial decline, restrictions, and business closures. A plethora of financial support measures were rolled out worldwide to support them, but there is a lack of research looking at the effect of the policy measures on self-employed people. To understand how different governmental financial support measures enhanced the resilience of the self-employed and improved their ability to manage the pandemic, we conducted a mixed-method study using policy analysis and semi-structured interviews. The documents described policies addressing governmental financial support in Sweden and Canada during the pandemic, and the interviews were conducted with Swedish and Canadian self-employed people to explore how they experienced the support measures in relation to their resilience. The key results were that self-employed people in both countries who were unable to telework were less resilient during the pandemic due to financial problems, restrictions, and lockdowns. The interviews revealed that many self-employed people in hard-hit industries were dissatisfied with the support measures and found them to be unfairly distributed. In addition, the self-employed people experiencing difficulties running their businesses reported reduced well-being, negatively affecting their business survival.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.240

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0130.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.063
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.366 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Circumpolar HealthSame topicEmployment and Welfare StudiesFrench-language works237,207