MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394904950 · doi:10.56367/oag-042-11369

A crisis in workplace mental health injuries... And in work itself

2024· article· en· W4394904950 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mélanie Dufour‐Poirier

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Access Government · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Health and Safety Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthDepression (economics)BurnoutAnxietyWork (physics)PsychologyOccupational safety and healthEpiphenomenonPublic healthPsychiatryPolitical scienceSociologyPublic relationsMedicineNursingClinical psychologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A crisis in workplace mental health injuries... And in work itself Dr Mélanie Dufour-Poirier, Associate Professor at the University of Montreal’s School of Industrial Relations, discusses opportunities to safeguard employees’ mental health injuries and wellbeing through union involvement. Well before the COVID-19 pandemic and the widespread requirement for telework, mental health injuries in the workplace (e.g., chronic stress, anxiety, depression, burnout and, in the worst cases, suicide) increased throughout the world. The acute rise in these problems is now considered the epiphenomenon of a global social and societal crisis, not to mention a major public health concern. That every year in Canada, on average, five hundred thousand workers are not at work due to mental health issues is testament to this. From that perspective, more and more research (including ours) shows the existence of a close correlation between how work is conceived, designed, organized and carried out and the prevalence of mental health problems in workplaces.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.008
Scholarly communication0.0080.008
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0070.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.546
Teacher spread0.443 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Access GovernmentSame topicOccupational Health and Safety ResearchFrench-language works237,207