MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399121078 · doi:10.29173/cjnser635

Social Enterprise as a Pathway to Work, Wellness and Social Inclusion for Canadians with Mental Illnesses and/or Substance-Use Disorders’

2024· article· en· W4399121078 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Rosemary Lysaght, Kelley A. Packalen, Terry Krupa, Lori E. Ross, Agnieszka Fecica, Michael J. Roy, Kathy L. Brock

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian journal of nonprofit and social economy research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMental Health and Patient Involvement
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInclusion (mineral)Social enterpriseSocial workSubstance useMental illnessMental healthPsychologyPsychiatryWork (physics)GerontologySociologyMedicinePublic relationsSocial psychologyPolitical scienceEconomic growthEngineeringEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

People with serious and persistent mental illnesses and/or substance use disorders are among the most economically and socially disenfranchised populations in Canada, and often present with long histories of labour market detachment and underemployment. Work engagement has the potential to improve social determinants of health while also harnessing productive capacity. This article reports on a five-year study examining the social, economic, and health impacts of Work Integration Social Enterprises (WISEs) in the mental health sector in Ontario, Canada. The findings shed light on the population that works in WISEs, its levels of social and labour market integration, and organizational features that influence worker outcomes. Results highlight both the importance of WISEs as a means of supporting employment, and challenges to organizational sustainability.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.366

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0180.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.191
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 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

Citations12
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian journal of nonprofit and social economy researchSame topicMental Health and Patient InvolvementFrench-language works237,207