MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396763131 · doi:10.3389/fgwh.2024.1346834

“On the books” yet “off the record”-occupational injury and migrant women: scoping review findings from OECD countries, with implications for New Zealand

2024· article· en· W4396763131 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kelly Radka, Emma Wyeth, Brooke Craik, Christina R. Ergler, Sarah Derrett

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Global Women s Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Health and Safety Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHealth Research Council of New ZealandUniversity of Otago
KeywordsMigrant workersDemographic economicsPolitical scienceEconomic growthEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Little appears to be known regarding the work-related injury (WRI) experiences of migrants (those born in a country other than their identified host country) and specifically, women migrants. Methods: As part of a wider PhD project investigating the WRI experiences of New Zealand (NZ) migrants, a review of NZ mainstream media coverage of migrants WRIs was undertaken, which identified no representations of migrant women's WRI experiences. In turn, a scoping review was undertaken to identify peer-reviewed publications reporting empirical findings about WRI experiences and outcomes for migrants in Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) member countries, including NZ. This paper aims to identify and describe findings for migrant women specifically. From 2,243 potential publications, 383 proceeded to full text review; ultimately 67 were retained. These 67 publications were reviewed to identify findings specifically for occupationally injured migrant women; 22 such publications (from 21 studies) were found. This paper reports: the characteristics of identified studies; characteristics of migrant women within; frameworks and theories used, and knowledge (and gaps) related to occupationally injured migrant women. Results: Publications came from only four OECD countries, the United States, Canada, Australia, and Spain. A range of study designs, and topic areas (working conditions, legal rights, identities, the role of gatekeepers, and precarity), were identified; however, only three studies reported findings for longer-term experiences and outcomes of WRIs. Nine publications considered theoretical models underpinning research, including theories about precarious work, stigmatization, and citizenship. However, there was a paucity of analyses of the WRI experience throughout the life-course, highlighting a gap in understanding of how these experiences are "lived" over the long term by occupationally injured migrant women. Discussion: Scoping review findings were synthesized using a provisional "matryoshka framing narrative" model, to be refined through forthcoming qualitative interviews with occupationally injured NZ migrant women. This model highlights the multitude of influences in WRI experiences, potentially specific to migrant women, suggesting the consequences of WRIs may be uneven, with migrant women experiencing different, and potentially, greater disparities in outcomes. These findings provide an impetus to investigate knowledge gaps and urgently address potential disparities in WRI outcomes for migrant women specifically.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.068
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.074

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.068
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0190.036
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0090.006
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.389 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Global Women s HealthSame topicOccupational Health and Safety ResearchFrench-language works237,207