MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392584948 · doi:10.3233/wor-230404

Impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on health and social professionals working with people with disabilities: A qualitative study

2024· article· en· W4392584948 on OpenAlexaffabout
Noémie Fortin-Bédard, David Bouchard, Naomie-Jade Ladry, Josiane Lettre, Normand Boucher, Simon Beaulieu‐Bonneau, Alexandra Lecours, Kadija Perreault, LeBlanc Annie, FranÇcois Routhier, Marie‐Ève Lamontagne

Bibliographic record

VenueWork · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCOVID-19 and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresCentre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux de la Capitale-NationaleUniversité LavalCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThematic analysisWorkloadPandemicSocial isolationSocial distanceCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PsychologyQualitative researchWork (physics)Social supportGerontologyMedicineSocial psychologySociologyPsychiatryDiseaseManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, protection and isolation measures established by the Canadian and Quebec governments have directly affected the work of health and social professionals (HSPs). These measures have added pressure on HSPs, complexified their work and added tasks to their already busy workload. However, few studies have explored in depth the impacts of the pandemic on HSPs working with people with disabilities. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to qualitatively explore the experiences of HSPs working among people with disabilities in the province of Quebec, Canada, during the COVID-19 pandemic (January and February 2021), including the impact on their work, the relationships with their colleagues, and on their immediate social and familial environment. METHODS: HSPs participated in a semi-structured interview. A mixed thematic analysis approach, combining inductive and deductive coding, was carried out using N'Vivo 12. RESULTS: Fifty-five HSPs participated in the interviews (mean [SD] age, 42 [9]). They mostly identified as women (91%). Three main themes representing the impacts of the pandemic were identified, including 1) Health and Well-being; 2) Family and social networks including the subthemes; 2.1) Fear of being a vector of contamination for their loved ones; 2.2) Work-family balance; 2.3) Social Network, and finally 3) Work, highlighting, including 3.1) Workload and adaptative strategies developed; 3.2) Relationship with colleagues; 3.3) Perceived support received at work, and 3.4) Services offered to patients. CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight the importance of closely tracking and supporting the well-being of HSPs.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.279
Threshold uncertainty score0.446

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.189
GPT teacher head0.523
Teacher spread0.334 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorkSame topicCOVID-19 and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207